J\.  B.  UOLAi, 
Book-bintierT  Book-s-cller, 

and    Stationery 
A"o     276  Greenwich-street. 


$ 


£5 

§ 

(0 
CL 

.^r 

"3 

j^ 

1c 

>,  ■** 

_Q- 

^ 

0) 
(0 

t- 

7^ 

—              1-3 

1c 

s 

CL 

§    fc 

o 

:            1 
i 

«»4 

$ 

.»*        o 

0) 

.    c 
bfl 
< 

*5>          H 

~a> 

£ 

o 

3 

~      5 

E 

«*■*         P5 

■v. 

ft 

hi 

$ 

cq 

_Q 

Si 

<* 

-a 

^ 

•s> 

<D 

:si 

*£ 

.4-» 

> 

-f* 

5 

<o 

Z\ 

CO 

Si 

«p 

a. 

Ax 

/ait  2*- 


. 


(Lvfrt    J^L    JiJju-    uIa*l<m> 


JfyuJ.   JAuJLl  (Uk  li9daffck 


t  .   " 


tfx  $2/i>.  &^y  ^L_ . 


J¥~  /W 


r 


-2ft. 


P  R  E  F  A  C  M. 

It  has  been  for  several  years  a  matter  of  wonder  to  rne, 
that  no  Eaptist  writer  has  ever  taken  up  the  Paedo  Baptists  directly 
on  the  question,  "  If  infant  baptism  be  not  commandetl  yi  scripture, 
is  k  forbidden?"  The  question  in  this  form,  as  they  generally  state 
it,  evidently  carries  with  it — 1.  A  concession  that  infant  baptism  is 
not  commanded:  2.  A  plea,  that,  though  it  is  not  commanded,  yet 
there  are  premises  from  which  it  may  be  inferred ;  and,  3.  That  if 
it  be  not  forbidden,  such  inference  must  be  allowed  as  valid  and 
sufficient  proof  of  it. 

This  is  the  whole  strain  of  Mr.  Edwards's  reasoning  upon  the 
subject,  and  comprehends  the  most,  and  best,  that  can  be  said  in  fa- 
vour of  infant  baptism;  and  I  readily  admit  the  validity  and  force 
of  such  evidence,  in  all  cases  where  the  premises  afford  sufficient 
grounds  for  it.  But  if  an  inference  be  drawn  from  premises  which 
do  not  aiTord  sufficient  grounds  for  it,  the  premises  themselves  im- 
plicitly forbid  the  inference;  and  there  is  no  necessity  that  a  prohi- 
bition should  be  express  in  any  case  of  the  kind;  for  if  a  point  may 
be  established  by  inference,  without  an  express  command,  a  point 
may  be  overthrown  by  inference,  without  an  express  prohibition. 
All  depends  upon  the  premises:  these  contain  the  weight  of  evi- 
dence, and  inference  only  brings  it  forward,  and  applies  it  for  or 
against  the  object  in  question. 

But  if  the  premises  with  reference  to  any  case  be  forbidden,  all 
inferences  drawn  from  those  premises,  in  support  of  it,  are  likewise 
forbidden;  and  of  course,  if  there  be  nothing  else  to  support  it,  it 
must  unavoidably  fall  to  the  ground.  I  think,  therefore,  that,  not- 
withstanding all  Mr.  E.  has  said,  I  have  fully  proved  that  infant  bap- 
tism is  forbidden.  For,  1.  The  premises  from  which  he  infers  that 
infants  should  be  baptised,  lie  in  the  Jewish  covenant.  2.  I  have 
attempted  to  prove  that  that  covenant  was  not  the  gospel  covenant, 
but  was  cast  out,  with  all  its  subjects,  as  such,  or  not  allowed  to 
stand  as  the  visible  church  under  the  gospel:  and,  3.  That  of  course, 
the  passages  which  he  has  produced  from  the  New  Testament  have  • 
no  connection  with  his  premises  in  the  old;  but  that  rather  his  use 
of  them  makes  the  gospel  contradict  and  falsify  itself. 


[  4  ]  • 

And  now,  if  I  have  proved  these  particulars,  I  have  proved  that 
infant  baptism  is  forbidden.  I  shall,  however,  feel  myself  happy  if 
the  reader  will  give  the  whole  a  candid  examination,  and  judge  for 
himself. 

Some  part  of  Mr.  E.'s  book  seemed,  at  first  view,  to  carry  con- 
siderable weight  with  it;  though  I  met  with  nothing  in  it  which  put 
me  to  a  stlhd,  either  with  regard  to  the  subject  or  mode  of  baptism, 
rrcept  the  effrontery  of  the  writer:  and  upon  the  second  and  third 
perusal,  it  appeared  like  an  old  garment,  worn  threadbare,  and  just 
turned,  and  cut  in  a  different  fashion,  to  make  it  look  like  some- 
thing new.  When  it  was  re-printed  in  Albany,  it  was  soon  follow- 
ed with  so  much  panegyric  and  triumph  from  many  of  those  whose 
cause  it  advocated,  that  I  wrote  upwards  of  an  hundred  miles  for  Dr. 
Jenkins's  reply,  intending  to  have  that  re-printed  likewise;,  but  could 
r.ot  procure  it.  I  thought,  indeed,  that  a  good  opportunity  was 
given  for  the  Baptists  to  avail  themselves  of  the  method  of  reason- 
ing against  infant  baptism,  laid  down  in  the  plan  above  stated,  and 
wished  to  see  it  done,  but  had  not  intended  to  write  any  thing  my- 
self; and,  besides,  I  thought  it  wisdom  in  me  to  leave  that  to  my 
superiors  in  ability  and  literature. 

In  this  situation,  the  impression  it  first  made  upon  my  mind  grad- 
ually wore  off;  so  that  I  scarcely  thought  of  it  once  in  a  month,  till 
about  the  first  of  January  last,  when  the  subject  visited  me  again 
somewhat  in  a  singular  manner,  as  there  was  then  no  particular  oc- 
casion for  it;  nor  did  I  seek  after  it,  nor  desire  it,  having  other 
things  tc  attend  to.  Sometimes,  for  several  minutes,  I  had,  by  some 
means  or  other,  such  views  of  the  difference  between  the  two  cove- 
nants-— the  taking  away  of  the  first — the  establishment  of  the  sec- 
ond, and  of  the  nature  of  the  gospel  church,  and  especially  the  im- 
portance of  a  right  u*e  of  the  ordinance  of  baptism  to  the  visibility 
of  true  religion  in  the  world,  as  I  do  not  recollect  to  have  realized 
before;  and  then  the  whole  would  pass  off,  perhaps,  for  two  or 
three  days. 

But,  shortly  after,  these  impressions  became  more  frequent  and 
forcible,  so  that  I  could  hardly  think  of  any  thing  else,  whether  I 
would  or  not;  and  so  free  were  my  thoughts  upon  the  subject,  that 
by  indulging  them  a  little  at  times,  I  had  a  sufficiency  far  several 
pages  studied  out  in  form,  before  I  was  aware,  or  had  begun  t» 


I         5.        1 

Write.  At  length  I  concluded  to  devote  myself  to  it,  and  pen  doWA 
my  thoughts  as  well  as  I  could;  being  led  in  particular  to  attempt 
the  overthrow  of  Mr.  E.'s  grand  argument,  contained  in  his  "Short 
Method,"  by  a  solution  of  the  above  question:  And,  however  im- 
perfect the  piece  may  appear  in  general;  yet,  if  it  comprehend  a 
sufficiency  for  that  purpose,  in  any  way  intelligible  to  a  common 
mind,  my  design  and  wishes  will  be  completely  answered:  but  if 
it  does  not,  I  will  heartily  thank  any  person  who  will  point  out  the 
deficiency ;  for  I  make  no  account  of  any  impressions  of  mind  what- 
ever, which  do  not  lead  to,  and  are  not  subordinate  to  gospel  truth. 

1  could  have  enforced  my  argument;  greatly,  and  added  others; 
but  judged  what  is  laid  down  to  be  sufficient  in  all  points  I  have 
touched  upon:  And  though  some,  perhaps,  may  dispute  me  with 
Regard  to  the  application  of  some  passages  of  scripture  1  have  quo- 
t  *d ;  yet  I  havevbeen  careful  to  introduce  two  or  three  at  least,  in 
all  cases,  which  I  think  cannot  be  disputed. 

In  conformity  to  general  custom,  I  have  applied  the  word  church 
to  the  Jewish  congregation  or  nation;  and  have  also  applied  the  terms 
flesh  and  spirit  to  the  two  covenants,  in  a  way  which  to  some  iua-v 
seem  rather  new. 

I  have  not  attempted  any  particular  defence  of  Mr.  Booth  -  but 
Mr.  E.'s  attacks  upon  his  arguments  have  often  made  me  think  of  a 
rapid  stream  of  water,  which,  when  meeting  with  a  number  of  rocks 
in  its  way,  swells,  and  roars,  and  makes  a  great  commotion,  and 
seems  almost  to  absorb  them  in  its  froth  and  foam;  but  passes  by,, 
and  leaves  them  as  they  were  before. 

In  comparing  their  arguments  upon  the  mode  of  baptism,  Mr.  E. 
in  many  instances,  appears  weak  and  frivolous,  there  being  a  suffi- 
ciency in  Mr.B.  to  answer  almost  every  thing  that  he  has  said  in  form: 
I  have  therefore  added  some  extracts  from  him  to  a  few  remarks  of 
my  own.  But,  like  Mr.  E.  I  have  thought  proper  to  lay  down  a 
scheme  of  the  controversy,  and  also  to  say  a  little  about  the  utility 
of  infant  baptism.  It  will  likewise  be  seen,  that  in  some  instances 
I  have  imitated  him  in  repeating  my  arguments,  and  statements,  at 
least  in  substance;  but  I  have  given  my  reasons,  in  some  measure, 
for  this  as  I  went  along. 

To  realize  the  application  of  a  part  of  the  motto  in  the  title-page, 
site  reader  should  know,  that  Mr.  E.  has  been  for  several  years  a 

A  2 


[  6  I 

minister  among  the  Baptists;  and  that  upon  leaving  them  he  wrote 
the  book  in  question,  which  he  entitled,  "  Candid  reasons  for  re- 
nouncing the  principles  of  Ant i-pado  Baptism;"  to  which  he  added 
his  "  Siiort  Method,"  by  way  of  appendix.  But  whoever  has  perused 
the  book,  has  found  it  abounding  rather  with  fleers  of  pride  and 
self-importance,  an  accrimonious  spirit,  misrepresentations,  and  great 
swelling  words  of  vanity.  It  is  evident,  that  he  is  a  man  of  a  very 
versatile  and  changeable  disposition;  for  it  appears  that  he  once  re- 
sided in  London  as  a  tradesman,  in  which  time  he  followed  a  Bap- 
tist minister  into  the  vestry  of  his  meeting-house,  and  challenged 
him  to  a  public  dispute  upon  the  subject  of  baptism,  being  then  very 
warm  on  the  Psedo  Baptist  side:  And  so  great  was  his  pride,  that 
the  dispute  must  not  be  private;  no,  it  must  be  public.  The  min- 
ister, however,  declined  the  combat;  but  the  next  he  heard  of  Mr. 
E.  he  had  commenced  Baptist,  and  had  been  baptized  by  another 
Baptist  minister:*  yet  now  we  see  him  off  again,  and  as  warm  for 
infant  baptism  as  before. 

When  I  had  about  two-thirds  completed  my  piece,  I  was  favour- 
ed with  an.  opportunity  of  reading  Dr.  Jenkins's  book,  with  which 
I  am  much  pleased;  but  have  thought,  that  there  was  such  a  diver- 
sity in  cur  arguments  and  methods  of  reasoning,  that  one  might  be 
read  as  a  kind  of  appendix  to  the  other:  And  that  the  great  Author 
cf  religion  would  divert  the  attention  of  all  his  true  children  from 
the  inventions  of  men,  and  direct  them  to  the  true  light  and  know- 
ledge of  his  own  v/ord  respecting  this  important  institution,  is  the 
hearty  prayer  of  Zion's  well-wisher, 

E,  I. 
N.  B.  I  have  had  the  Albany  edition  of  Mr.  E.'s  book> 

*  Jenkins's  1st  LetUr. 


-■■ 


A  THOROUGH  METHOD,  &V, 


iVlR.  EDWARDS  feems  to  vaunt,  as  though  he  thought  he 
had  fmitten  the  Baptifts  with  his  pen,  as  Sampfon  fmote  the 
Philiftines  with  the  jaw-bone ;  but  till  he  has  produced  fome- 
thing  more  weighty  againft  their  caufe,  and  in  defence  of  hi* 
own,  they  will  never  feel  themfelves  obliged  to  quit  the  field, 
i.or  fubmit  to  any  terms  of  capitulation  with  him.  I  mail  not 
attempt  to  anfwer  his  arguments  in  form  :  My  defign  is,  to 
ftrike  away  the  whole  pretended  fcriptural  foundation  of  infant 
baptifm  at  a  fingle  ftroke ;  which  if  done,  the  whole  fabric, 
with  every  thing  pertaining  to  it,  will  of  courfe  come  down. 

The  Pa?do  Baptifts  in  general,  and  Mr.  Edwards  in  particu- 
lar, do  not  pretend  that  there  is  any  exprefs  command,  prece- 
dent or  example  in  the  facred  fcriptures  for  the  baptifing  of 
infants  ;  but,  fay  they,  it  is  proved  by  good  inferences  and  con- 
fcquences.  But  if  they  believe,  that  the  urging  of  inferences 
and  confequences  in  proof  of  it  is  a  juft  and  proper  method  of 
reafoning,  they  will  not  deny  the  urging  of  inferences  and  con- 
fequences againft  it,  to  be  equally  fo.  "We  ought  however  to 
cbferve  firft,  that  the  validity  and  force  of  all  inferential  reafon- 
ing depend  entirely  upon  the  premiles  from  which  it  is  drawn. 
If  the  premifes  and  the  inferences  agree  together,  either '  of 
them  may  be  faid  to  be  good.  But  if  their  agreement  exifts 
only  in  the  opinion  of  a  difputant,  they  are  falfe,  and  will  ferve 
only  to  expofe  the  weaknefs  of  his  caufe. 

Mr.  E.  has  given  a  ftatement  of  his  two  arguments  in  fup- 
port  of  infant  baptifm,  thus :  "  God  has  conftituted  in  his 
church  the  memberlhip  of  infants?  and  admitted  them  to  it  by 


t    .      8  J 

a  rc-Ugiouc  rite/' — "  The  church  memberfhip  of  infant  s#  igajf 
never  fet  afide  by  God  or  man  ;  but  continues  in  force,  under 
the  fanction  of  God,  to  the  prefcnt  day,"  His  general  infer- 
ence is,  that  they  ought  ftiil  to  be  admitted  by  baptifm. 

Taking  the  fenfe  of  all  thefe  together,  according  to  his  own 
explanation,  the  ftatement  would  confift  of  three  parts  :  1 .  The 
premifes ;  the  membership  of  infants  was  conftituted  in  the 
Jewifh  church,  and  they  were  admitted  to  it  by  circumcitien, 
2.  An  objective  argument  to  clear  the  way  from  the  premifes 
to  the  inference;  their  membership  is  no  v. here  reverfed,  or 
forbidden  in  the  gofpel.  S.  The  inference  itfelfj  they  ought 
therefore  to  be  admitted  full  by  baptifm. 

Now  it  is  eafy  to  fee,  that  his  whole  caufe  depends  entirely 
upon  the  connection  between  his  premifes  and  the  inference, 
as  before  fcated  ;  if  that  be  fare,  he  is  certainly  upon  good 
ground.  He  feems  to  have  been  aware  of  that,  and  therefore 
has  done  what  he  could  to  fuppcrt  it ;  and  two  things  in  par* 
ticular  were  efTentialiy  necefTary  to  that  purpofe  :  1.  To  fub- 
flantiate  the  afiertion,  that  the  gofpel  has  no  where  forbidden 
the  member/hip  of  infants  in  the  villble  church.  And  2.  To 
make  it  appear  that  the  New  Teftament  does  in  fact  acknow- 
ledge the  Old  Teftament  church  to  beeffentiallythefame  with 
its  own.  All  his  other  arguments  in  defence  of  infant  baptifm, 
are  but  as  the  outlines,  or  fuburbs  of  thefe  two  grand  and  capi* 
tal  points. 

Important,  however,  as  thefe  two  points  are  to  his  caufe,  he 
has  relied  the  flrft  upon  two  (lender  pillars  only.  1.  His  own 
word ;  h  e  fay:,  "  That  there  is  in  the  New  Teftament  no  law- 
whatever  to  fet  afide  the  primitive  right  of  infants  to  church 
memberfhip."  2.  A  pretended  fufrrage  from  the  Baptifts  ;  he 
fays  "  that  they  readily  grant  it."  See  p.  35.-— The  fecond  he 
has  endeavoured  to  fupport  by  a  variety  of  reaf owing  from  fun- 
dry  parages  in  the  New  Teftament* 


t       o       ] 

But  here  again  it  is  evident,  that  the  laft  of  thefe  particulars 
depencfrgreatly  upon  the  nrft.  If  the  gofpel  have  any  where  for- 
bidden the  membership  of  infants  in  the  vifible  church  under  it, 
it  cannot  allow  the  Jewifti  and  Chriftian  church  to  be  efientially 
the  fame ;  for  if  fo,  it  muft  allow  that  which  at  the  fame  time 
it  forbids,  and  reject  that  which  is  eflentially  the  fame  with  it- 
felf.  All  then  that  is  neceffary  to  be  done  to  recover  the  ground 
which  he  fuppofes  he  has  taken  from  us,  and  overthrow  his 
caufe  even  to  final  ruin,  is  to  mow  that  the  gofpel  does  actu- 
ally forbid  the  memberfhip  of  infants  in  the  New  Teftament 
church ;  and  thus  affords  us  premifes  for  ftronger  inferences 
and  confequences  againft  their  baptifm,  than  any  thing  in  the 
Jewifh  church  affords  him  for  it.  I  do  not  fay  that  I  fhall  per- 
form this  ;  the  reader  will  judge  of  that  when  he  fees  what  1 
have  written :  but  this  I  fay,  I  intend  to  perform  it,  and  think 
it  indeed  no  very  difficult  tafk.  For  that  purpofe  I  give  a  gen- 
eral ftatement  of  my  argument  a6  follows : 

The  gospel  acluaUy  forbids  the  member/hip  of 'infants,  as 
fuch,  in  the  New  Teflament  church  ;  and  therefore  they  ought 
not  to  be  baptized. 

It  will  be  obvious  to  every  obferver,  from  what  has  been  faid 
before,  that  this  ftatement  confifts  of  premifes,  and  an  inference  j 
and  that  to  fupport  the  inference  it  is  only  necefiary  to  eftab= 
lifh  the  premifes. 

According  to  Mr.  E.  and  the  Psedo  Baptifts  in  general,  the 
parallel  between  the  two  churches,  ordinances,  and  their  fub- 
jects,  runs  thus  :  The  Jewifh  and  Chriftian  church  are  eflen- 
tially the  fame — Circumciiion  and  baptifm,  in  their  ufe  and 
meaning,  are  eflentially  the  fame — Believers,  with  their  whole 
families,  were  taken  into  the  Jewifh  church  by  circumcifion— 
Believers,  with  their  whole  families*  fhould  be  admitted  mem- 
bers of  the  gofpel  church  by  baptifm.  But  this  parallel  is  con- 
fufed,  and  prefents  the  Chriftian  church  under  the  vail  of  Juda- 


L        10       J 

ifm ;  and  hence  the  reafbn  why  the  Paedo  Baptifts  have  no 
clearer  ideas  of  the  true  nature  of  a  gofpel  church.  What  if 
we  fhould  infift  upon  the  following  addition  to  it  ?  The  feed 
of  the  fiefh  in  Abraham's  family,  and  the  feed  of  the  flefh  in  the 
families  of  believers  under  the  gofpel,  are  eflentially  the  fame. 
The  feed  of  the  flefh  in  Abraham's  family  was  raft  out — So 
fliould  be  alfo  the  flefhly  feed  of  believers  under  the  gofpel. 

I  cannot  fay,  that  Mr.  E.  or  any  of  his  brethren  would  really 
deny  the  exiftence  of  two  feeds.  They  could  hardly  have  the 
confidence  to  affirm,  that  Ifaac  and  Ifhmael,  in  their  moral  re- 
lations, were  eflentially  the  fame  ;  nor  that  the  children  of  be* 
lievers  now,  who  have  no  faith,  are  in  that  refpecl:  eflentially 
the  fame  with  thofe  who  believe  with  their  parents  ;  and  yet, 
furpriiing  to  me,  they  contend  that  they  are  eflentially  the  fame 
in  regard  to  their  right  to  the  vifible  badges  of  Chriftianity,  and 
the  privileges  of  the  gofpel  church.  1  repeat  it — their  opinion 
in  this  refpecl:  is  furpriiing  to  me  ;  for  I  verily  believe  that  a 
great  part  of  the  four  Evangelifts,  a  part  of  the  Ads  of  the 
apofrles,  a  part  of  the  Epiftle  to  the  Romans,  of  both  to  the 
Corinthians,  the  whole  of  that  to  the  Galatians,  a  part  of  thofe 
to  the  Ephefians,  Philippians,  Cololfians,  TheiThlonians,  and 
the  whole  of  that  to  the  Hebrews,  were  written  in  direct  op- 
pofition  to  it* 

Here  the  reader  fhould  notice  in  particular,  that  the  queuion 
difputed  lies  between  tivo  forts  of  children  in  the  fame  family r, 
or  of  the  fame  father  ;  and  that  this  is  the  foundation  of  the 
whole  difpute.  Abraham  had  children  who,  with  himfeif,  were 
heirs  of  the  promife  through  the  righteoufnefs  of  faith  ;  thefe 
pertained  to  the  fpiritual  Ifrael,  comprehending  the  faithful  in 
all  nations.  Abraham  had  alfo  children  who,  by  the  works  of 
the  law,  were  heirs  of  the  promife  through  the  law — See  Gen. 
xvii.  8,  Rom,  iv.  is,  14.  Thefe  pertained  only  to  the  nation 
of  the  literal  Ifrael,  and  were  not  allowed  to  be  heirs  with  the 


C       »       ] 

ilrft  in  any  thing  ftri&ly  pertaining  to  the  Meffiah's  kingdom ; 
but  becaufe  they  were  children  of  the  fame  father,  they  raifed 
a  controverfy  and  contended  for  an  equal  right.  This  reduces 
our  argument  to  particulars  ;  And, 

I.  It  is  certain,  that  there  were  two  feeds  pertaining  to  A- 
braham  as  a  father.  Our  Saviour,  when  here  upon  earth,  de<- 
clared  to  fome  of  the  Jews,  as  related  in  the  yiiith  chap,  of  John 
and  37th  verfe,  that  he  knew  them  to  be  Abraham's  feed  ;  but 
in  the  39th,  he  insinuates  to  the  amount  of  an  alTertion,  that 
they  were  not  Abraham's  feed.  "  If  ye  were  Abraham's  chil- 
dren, ye  would  do  the  works  of  Abraham;"  and  in  the  44th  v. 
he  politively  declares  them  to  be  the  children  of  the  devil. 
According  to  thefe  pafifages,  when  put  together — They  (were 
the  children  of  Abraham — They  were  not  the  children  of  Abra- 
ham— They  (were  the  children  of  the  devil.  Now  if  Abraham 
had  no  feed  but  fuch  as  thefe,  his  feed  were  all  the  children  of 
the  devil ;  none  of  them  belonged  to  God.  The  fad  however 
is,  that  Abraham  had  two  feeds — one  fpirituah  like  himfelf  in 
faith  and  good  works  ;  and  the  other  natural,  like  himfelf  in 
the  flefh,  but  morally  the  children  of  the  devil,  and  like  him  in 
wicked  works.  If  this  were  not  the  cafe,  the  author  of  truth 
itfelf  muft  have  been  guilty  of  an  abfolute  falftiood  in  one  of 
thefe  aflertions  ;  for  certainly  they  could  not  all  have  been  true. 

The  apoftle  Paul,  in  the  ixth  chap,  to  the  Rom.  and  6th  ver. 
hath  alfo  declared,  "  That  they  are  not  all  Ifrael,  which  are 
of  Ifrael."  Here  an  idea  of  two  Ifraels  is  held  up  to  view  ; 
otherwife  we  can  make  no  fenfe  of  the  apoftle's  mode  of  ex- 
prefiion,  and  efpecially  when  we  compare  the  text  with  fome 
parts  of  the  context.  Thefr/l  was  the  flejhly,  the  latter  the 
Spiritual  Ifrael ;  and  a  part  of  the  firft  pertained  alfo  to  the  lat- 
ter, but  not  all.  "  Neither  becaufe  they  are  the  feed  of  Abra- 
ham, are  they  all  children ;  but  in  Isaac  mall  thy  feed  t>e 
called— ver.  7."  Here  again  two  forts  of  children  are  fpecified, 


[         12        3 

both  belonging  to  the  fame  father.  The  firji  is  faid  to  be 
Abraham's  feed,  but  yet  not  children.  If  then  there  were  chil- 
dren, they  muft  have  been  a  different  fort  of  character,  and 
yet  Abraham's  children  ;  for  unto  no  man  but  Abraham 
was  it  faid,  "  That  in  Ifaac  mall  thy  feed  be  called."  The 
meaning  is,  that  their  being  the  children  of  Abraham,  accord- 
ing to  the  flefh,  did  not  make  them  his  children  according  to  the 
fpirit ;  and  that  therefore  his  children  according  to  the  flefh, 
were  not  all  his  fpiritual  children.  But  the  apoftle  goes  on, 
and  explains  himfelf,  ver.  8.  "  That  is  they  which  are  the 
children  of  the  jtejh,  thefe  are  not  the  children  of  God ;  but 
the  children  of  the  promife  are  counted  for  the  feed."  In  this 
palfage  the  children  of  God  and  the  children  of  the  promife 
are  evidently  the  fame,  and  are  peculiarly  diftinguifhed  from 
the  children  of  the  fiefh  ;  for  it  is  exprefsly  faid,  that  the  chil- 
dren of  the  flefh  are  not  the  children  of  God  ;  but  the  children 
of  God,  or  of  the  -  promife,  are  counted  for  the  feed,  that  is, 
the  true  feed  of  which  the  gofpel  church  mould  confift. 

The  fame  apoftle,  in  his  letter  to  the  Galatian  church,  fays, 
chap.  Hi.  ver.  16,  "  Now  to  Abraham  and  his  feed,  were  the 
promifes  made.  He  faith  not,  and  to  feeds,  as  of  many  ;  but 
as  of  one,"  Sec.  Now  if  Abraham  had  not  had  two  feeds,  this 
remark,  and  efpecially  when  compared  with  the  others,  would 
have  been  abfurd  and  foolifh.  Again,  he  fays,  chap.  iv.  ver. 
22,  "  It  is  written,  that  Abraham  had  two  fons  f*  and  then 
goes  on  to  diftinguifh  them  :  One  "  was  born  after  the  jfefh" — 
the  other  "  was  by  promife" — ver.  23.  One  "  was  born  after 
the  jfejh" — the  other  "  was  born  after  the  fpirit" — ver.  29. 

Now,  though  the  molt  of  the  paflages  I  have  referred  to  be 
undeniably  plain  and  explicit;  yet,  fmce  many  people  are  fo 
much  under  the  vail  of  Mofes  with  regard  to  the  difference 
between  the  two  feeds,  I  will  alfo  point  theiu4o  a  few  figures 


[        is        ] 

which  the  fcriptures  have  made  ufe  of  to  illuftrate  the  diftinc- 
tion. 

When  John  the  Baptift  came  preaching  in  the  wildernefs  of 
Judea,  he  feems  to  have  confidered  the  vifible  church  under 
the  figure  of  a  field,  full  of  fruit  trees ;  and  accommodating 
his  language  to  the  figure,  fays,  Mat.  chap.  iii.  ver.  10,  "  Eve- 
ry tree  which  bringeth  not  forth  good  fruit,"  &c.  This  im- 
plies that  there  were  two  forts  of  trees  in  the  field.  Some 
brought  forth  good  fruit,  and  fome  did  not ;  a  circumftance 
however  which  till  that  time  had  not  been  confidered  as  a  teft 
of  their  vifible  Handing  there.  Thefe  anfwered  to  the  two 
feeds  in  the  church. 

When  addrefling  fome  of  the  Jews,  he  fays,  ver.  9,  "  Think 
not  to  fay  within  yourfelves,  We  have  Abraham  to  our  father  ; 
for  I  fay  unto  you,  that  God  is  able  of  thefe  flones<,  to  raife  up 
children  unto  Abraham."  Here  he  obje&s  againft  one  kind  of 
relation  to  Abraham,  and  acknowledges  another ;  of  courfe  6*^ 
there  muft  have  been  two,  of  a  very  different  nature.  The 
ftones  pointed  out  the  Gentiles,  who,  in  comparifon  with  the 
Jews,  had  always  been  confidered  as  the  ftones  of  the  ftreet,  or 
as  the  rough  Hones  of  the  wildernefs  ;  and  as  it  was  impoflible 
that  a  Gentile  by  nature  ihould  become  a  natural  child  of  A- 
braham,  their  being  made  his  children  can  be  underftocd  only 
in  a  fpiritual  fenfe. 

Again,  he  reprefents  the  vifible  church,  ver  12,  under  the 
figure  of  a  "  floor,"  in  which,  till  that  time,  the  "  wheat''  and 
the  "  chaff"  had  lain  together.  The  wheat  and  the  chaff  are 
exprefiive  of  the  difference  between  the  two  feeds. 

See  again,  chap.  viii.  ver.  11  and  12,  "Many  fhall  come  from 
the  eaft  and  weft,  and  fhall  fit  down  with  Abraham,  and  Ifaac, 
and  Jacob,  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  But  the  children  of  the 
kingdom  fhall  be  caft  out,"  &c.  Here  two  different  forts  of 
people  are  fpoken  of,  and  it  is  clearly  evident  that  they  were 
the  two  feeds. 

B 


[       m       3 

We  find  alfo  in  the  eleventh  chap,  to  the  Rom.  the  vifible 
church  rcprefented  by  the  figure  of  an  "  olive  tree,"  in  which 
were  two  forts  of  "  branches."  One  il  natural"  and  in  a  ftate 
of  "unbelief" — this  is  exprefsly  laid,  ver.  20  and  21.  The 
other  "fpiritual"  or  ftanding  by  "faith" — this  is  alfo  exprefs, 
ver.  20. 

But  how  clearly  has  the  apoftle  illuftrated  this  whole  affair, 
by  the  two  women  and  their  children^  which  were  in  Abra- 
ham's family,  as  we  fee  in  Gal.  ivth  chap,  from  the  21ft  ver. 
to  the  end.  Here  Hagar  and  Sarah  are  fet  in  contrajU  and 
their  different  circumftances  pointed  out.  Hagar  is  faid  to  be 
the  bond-woman  and  Sarah  the  free ,  and  their  children  to  have  their 
ftandings  accordingly.  "  Which  things,"  he  fays,  "  are  an  al- 
legory ^  for  thefe  are  the  two  covenants."  Then  certainly 
there  were  two  covenants  ;  but  no  more  relating  to  this  cafe, 
for  if  there  had  been  even  another,  the  apoftle  would  not  have 
faid,  the  two  covenants,  but  two  of  the  covenants. 

Hagar  reprefented  the  covenant  in  which  the  JewiJJj  church 
ftood  ;  and  Sarah  that  in  wThich  the  Chriftian  church  ftands. 
IJhmael  characterized  the  members  of  the  Jewiih  church  in 
general,  except  the  few  who  were  alfo  fpiritual ;  and  even 
thefe,  in  regard  to  the  principles  on  which  they  had  their  ftand- 
ing there.  Ifaac  characterizes  the  true  members  of  the  Chriftian 
church.  Perhaps  with  regard  to  Sarah  and  Jfaac,  this  ftate- 
ment  will  not  be  difputed,  and  with  regard  to  Hagar  and  Ifh- 
mael  it  cannot ;  for  the  apoftle  has  msde  Hagar  to  be  Mount 
Sinai,  in  Arabia,  where  the  Jewifh  church  received  its  general 
code  of  laws  ;  and  Mount  Sinai  to  anfwer  to  Jerufalem,  which 
was  the  feat  of  worfhip  to  that  church,  until  the  gofpel  difpen- 
fation  took  place.  In  a  word,  the  apoftle  is  exprefs,  that  there 
was  but  one  father,  but  yet — two  mothers — two  feeds — two 
covenants,  and  two  Jerufalems,  the  one  in  a  ftate  of  bon- 
dage and  the  other  free  ;  and  hence  we  form  the  idea  of  two 


t         13         ] 

forts  of  Jews,  one  outward,  and  the  other  inward,  agreeable 
to  Rom.  ii.  ver.  28,  29. 

Again  it  was  evidently  in  allufion  to  the  two  feeds,  that 
Chrift  faid  to  Nicodemus,  "  That  which  is  born  of  thcfefh  is 
fiefh  ;  and  that  which  is  born  of  the  fpirit  is  fpirit" — See  John 
iii.  6.  And  in  allufion  to  thefe  alfo  the  apoftle  reproves  his 
Galatian  brethren,  "  Are  ye  fo  foolifh,  having  begun  in  the 
Spirit,  are  ye  now  made  perfect  by  the  flefh  ?"  That  is,  having 
begun  in  the  line  of  faith,  according  to  the  gofpel,  do  ye  alfd 
now  introduce  that  of  the  flefh,  according  to  the  Uw,  and 
oblige  yourfelves,  by  being  circumcifed,  to  obferve  all  the  rites 
and  ceremonies  of  the  law,  under  a  notion  of  rendering  your 
religion  perfect  ? — See  Gal.  chap.  iii.  ver.  3,  and  chap.  v.  f>. 
But  now, 

II.  Comes  the  trying  part  of  the  argument  on  which  all  de- 
pends :  If  I  have  proved  that  there  are  two  feeds,  of  quite  dtf* 
ferent  defcents,  principles  and  characters,  the  next  queftion  is, 
are  they,  according  to  fcripture,  both  heirs  to  the  privileges  and 
inftitutions  of  the  gofpel  church  ?  Try  the  fcripture  upon  this 
point :  What  faith  it  ?  "  Cast  out  the  bond-woman  and  her 
/on  :  for  the  fon  of  the  bond-woman  shall  not  be  heir  with 
the  fon  of  the  free^woman." — Gal.  iv.  30* 

Now  if  in  fact  Ifhmael  did  reprefent  the  natural  feed  in  the 
vifible  church  under  the  firft  difpenfation,  this  pafTage,  for  any 
thing  that  I  can  fee,  eftablifhes  the  premifes  from  which  I  infer 
that  infants  mould  not  be  baptifed,  to  all  intents  and  purpofes. 
But  that  the  reader  may  fee  that  I  do  not  for  this  depend  upon 
one  folitary  text,  I  will  add  a  few  others,  which  I  think  are 
quite  to  the  purpofe.  "  Think  not  to  fay  within  yourfelves, 
We  have  Abraham  to  our  father." — Mat.  iii.  9.  "  And  now 
alfo  the  ax  is  laid  unto  the  root  of  the  trees,  therefore  every  tree 
which  bringeth  not  forth  good  fruit  is  hewn  down  and  raft  in- 
to the  fire" — ver,  10.  "  His  fan  is  in  his  hand,  and  he  will 
throughly  purge  his  floor" — and  "  will  burn  up  the  chaff  with 


[  16          ] 

unquenchable  fire" — ver.  12.  "  The  children  of  the  kingdom 
flail  be  cafi  out" — chap.  viii.  1 2.  "  Except  a  man  be  born  again 
he  cannot  fee  the  kingdom  of  God." — John  iii.  3.  "  If  they 
which  are  of  the  law  be  heirs,  faith  is  made  'void,  and  the 
promise  made  of  none  effect" — Rom.  iv.  14.  "  Neither  be- 
caufe  they  are  the  feed  of  Abraham,  are  they  all  children." 
"  The  children  of  the  flelh  are  not  the  children  of  God" — 
chap.  ix.  7,  8.  "  Becaufe  of  unbelief,  they,"  that  is  the  natu- 
ral branches,  "  were  broken  off"— chap.  xi.  20.  I  might  con- 
tinue to  add  fcripture,  and  heap  argument  upon  argument ; 
but  I  confider  it  quite  needlefs,  and  fhall  therefore  turn  my  at- 
tention to  obviate  an  objection  which  perhaps  may  be  thrown 
in  my  way. 

It  may  be  afked,  is  it  certain  from  all  this,  that  the  fcripture 
refers  to  the  natural  feed,  as  infants ;  or  as  far  back  as  to  its 
infantile  ftate  ?  I  anfwer,  that  nothing  is  plainer  than  that  the 
diftinguifhing  characleriftics  of  both  the  feeds  are  founded  in 
their  birth  principles.  The  new  birth,  is  the  fource  of  piety 
and  religion  in  the  fpiritual  line.  But  he  that  was  born  after 
theflefh,  was  a  mocking  p  erf e  cut  or.  It  is  certain  that  the  apof- 
tle  considered.  Ifhmael  as  making  a  part  of  the  allegory  in  his 
birth,  and  even  in  his  conception  ;  yea,  and  in  his  mother  be- 
fore, for  he  fays,  "  He  who  was  of  the  bond-woman  was  born 
after  the  flesh."  Now  as  all  mankind  in  nature,  or  accord- 
ing to  the  flelh  (ince  the  fall,  fpring  from  a  gracelefs  and  pol- 
luted fource,  fo  they  are  born  into  the  world  in  a  gracelefs  and 
polluted  ftate ;  and  hence  the  terms  nature  and  flelh  are  ufed 
with  reference  to  the  feed,  to  fignify  that  there  was  nothing  but 
nature  in  its  pollution  there.  No  caufe  can  produce  an  enecl 
above  itfelf.  "  That  which  is  born  of  the  flelh,  is  flelh  ;"  that 
is  to  fay,  flefli  only ;  and  this  was  true  of  all  the  natural  feed 
of  Abraham,  as  fuch,  and  is  equally  true  of  all  the  natural  feed 
of  believers  now. 


I      17      ] 

Whoever  undertakes  to  controvert  this  reafoning  mull  firfl 
eftabli/h  one  of  the  three  following  pofitions  :  Either,  1,  That 
the  children  of  believers  are  not  the  fruits  of  their  nature,  but 
of  their  faith  :  Or,  2,  That  the  children  of  believers,  in  their 
natural  generation,  are  qualified  by  their  parents'  faith,  for  gof- 
pel  inftitutions :  Or,  3,  That  the  children  of  believers,  in  their 
infantile  ftate,  are  not  confidered  by  fcripture  as  being  either 
flefhly  or  fpiritual.  But  if  the  firfl  of  thefe  were  true,  unbe- 
lievers could  not  have  children.  If  the  fecond  were  true,  grace 
muft  be  propagated  with  nature,  and  the  children  of  believers 
would,  in  confequence  of  their  defcent,  be  morally  better  than 
thofe  of  other  men.  And  indeed  fome  Paedo  Baptifts  feem  in- 
clined to  think  fo,  though  they  dare  not  afiertthe  fact ;  but 
(till  will  have  it,  that  their  faith  fomehow  renders  their  children 
fubjects  of  baptifm :  a  right  Jewifh  notion,  as  I  iha.ll  have  oc- 
cation  to  fhow  in  the  concluficn. 

If  the  laft  be  true,  and  fuch  children  ought  to  be  baptized, 
it  muft  be  becanfe  the  Lord  hath  required  it  without  regard  to 
their  moral  qualities,  good  or  bad,  and  fome  of  Mr.  E.'s  rea- 
foning actually  infinuates  that  idea  ;  but  it  is  a  flat  contradic- 
tion to  all  thofe  plain  paffages  which  have  founded  the  differ- 
ent characters  of  the  two  feeds  in  their  birth  principles,  and  ac- 
cordingly negatived,  or  aflerted  their  heirlhip  to  the  privileges 
and  blefiings  of  the  new  covenant,  as  I  have  fhewn  above. 

But  the  queftion  may  be  carried  (till  farther  :  Was  not  Ifh- 
mael  admitted  into  the  vifible  church  in  Abraham's  family,  and 
continued  there  till  he  had  committed  an  attrocious  crime ;  and 
if  fo,  why  fhould  not  the  children  of  believers  now  be  admitted 
into  the  vifible  church  by  baptifm,  and  continued  there  fo 
long  as  they  are  outwardly  moral  and  upright  ?  I  anfwer,  that 
with  regard  to  Ifhmael  this  was  efientially  necefiary,  in  order 
to  make  out  the  allegory.  Hagar  was  a  mother  in  Abraham's 
houfe,  and  of  courfe  Ifhmael  was  a  fon,  and  had  his  ftanding 
in  the  vifible  church  fome  time  before  Sarah  appeared  as  a 

B2 


t  18  ] 

mother  with  the  promifed  feed.  But  on  the  day  that  Ifaac 
was  weaned,  he  being  then  about  fix  years  of  age,  and  Ifhmael 
not  far  from  twenty,  for  fome  reafon  or  other  Ifhmael  was  of- 
fended, and  mocked,  or  defpifed  him,  as  his  mother  had  before 
defpifed  Sarah — See  Gen.  xvi.  5,  and  xxi.  9,  upon  which  they 
were  both  caft  out  together. 

In  this,  as  we  have  before  feen,  Hagar  was  an  allegory  of  the 
covenant  upon  which  the  vifible  church  was  founded  under  the 
firft  difpenfation ;  and  Ifhmael  of  the  Jewifh  nation,  or  the 
natural  feed  of  Abraham  in  general,  which  occupied  the  vifible 
church  until  the  covenant  of  grace;  as  the  foundation  of  the 
vifible  church  under  the  gofpel,  like  Sarah  and  Ifaac,  came  in 
with  Chrift  as  its  head,  and  the  fpiritual  feed  as  its  members. 
But  as  Ifhmael  had  treated  Ifaac  in  the  allegory,  fo  the  carnal 
Jews  treated  Chrift  and  his  followers ;  which  feems  to  have  been 
purpofeiy  intended  to  demonftrate,  that  neither  their  covenant, 
nor  themfelves,  as  fuch,  were  the  covenant  and  people  of  which 
the  Lord  intended  to  raife  up  his  true  kingdom  in  the  world. 
The  covenant  therefore,  with  all  its  carnal  fubjedts,  rites,  cere- 
monies, &c.  both  the  mother  and  the  fon,  as  in  the  allegory, 
were  utterly  caft  out.  There  is,  therefore,  nothing  here  on 
which  to  build  the  right  of  the  children  of  believers,  as  fuch, 
to  gofpel  institutions ;  for  certainly  they  are  not  the  fpiritual 
feed,  nor  could  they,  like  Ifhmael,  be  confidered  as  allegorical 
of  things  to  come.  And  if  Ifhmael,  a  natural  fon  of  faithful 
Abraham,  was  caft  out  with  his  mother,  to  fhew,  that  upon 
the  coming  of  Chrift  all  the  natural  feed,  as  fuch,  fhould  be 
caft  out  with  their  covenant ;  then  if  their  covenant  was  caft 
cut,  as  the  apoftle  affirms,  all  footing  for  the  natural  feed  of 
believers,  as  fuch,  in  the  vifible  church  was  from  that  time  forth 
annihilated  forever.  Nor  will  it  anfwer  any  purpofe  for  the 
Paedo  Baptifts  to  plead  that  Hagar  only  reprefented  one  of  the 
difpenfations  of  the  covenant ;  for  the  apoftle  in  the  allegory 
has  exprefsly  made  her  one  of  the  real  covenants. 


[  19         ] 

I  would  alfo  remark  here,  that  the  confidering  of  the  vifibie 
church  under  the  figures  of  a  field,  floor,  and  the  olive  tree,  by  no 
means  infinuates  a  continuation  of  the  fame  church.  The  con- 
fideration  ferves  to  fhow,  that  God  has  but  one  kind  of  vifibie 
church  in  the  world  at  a  time  ;  and  thefe  figures  firft  exprefs  a 
compound  idea  of  the  two  feeds,  implying,  that  fome  of  both 
were  comprehended  in  the  Jewifh  church  ;  and  then  diftinguifh 
and  feparate  them,  to  fhow  that  but  one  of  them  only  mould 
conftitute  the  vifibie  church  under  the  gofpel.  But  fo  much 
has  been  faid  of  the  olive  tree  that  I  would  go  a  little  farther 
upon  that  part  of  the  fubjecl:.  Some  fuppofe,  that  Chrift  was 
intended  by  the  root,  and  the  olive  tree  ;  but  if  fo,  when  the  /. 
apoftle  fays,  "  but  towards  thee  goodnefs,  if  thou  continue  in  /i*^ 
goodnefs ;  otherwife  thou  alfo  fhalt  be  cutoff;"  if  he  were 
fpeaking  of  the  real  believer,  ftrongly  infinuates  the  poffihly  of  A* 
falling  from  grace  ;  and  if  he  were  fpeaking  of  the  formalift, 
he  as  ftrongly  infinuates  the  propriety  of  his  (landing  in  a  vifi- 
bie profeflion  fo  long  as  he  conformed  to  the  outward  rules  of 
religion. 

In  my  view  of  the  matter,  from  the  apoftle's  time  down  to 
the  prefent  period,  the  puzzling  point  in  this  controverfy  has 
been,  How  that  fome  mould  be  considered  heirs  of  the  promife, 
becaufe  they  (were  Abraham *s  feed ;  and  yet  others  who  were 
his  feed  be  excluded  from  it.  It  was  therefore  to  illuftrate  the 
idea  of  the  two  feeds,  which  compofed  the  two  churches,  as 
defcending  from  one  father,  that  the  apoftle  introduces  the 
figure  of  two  forts  of  branches  fpringing  out  of  one  olive  tree. 
But  when  the  Paedo  Baptifts  argue  from  the  onenefs,  or  fame- 
nefs  of  the  olive  tree,  to  the  famenefs  of  the  two  churches,  they 
adopt  the  very  principle  which  the  Judaizing  teachers  always 
hung  upon,  and  only  trifle  to  no  purpofe.  They  might  as  well 
come  up  at  once  to  the  main  point,  and  argue  from  the  cir- 
cumftance  of  Abraham's  being  but  one  man,  that  therefore  his 
fiefh  and  faith  were  in  eflence  but  cwand  the  fame  thing  j  and 


C      20      3 

indeed,  without  this  hypothefts,  all  their  arguments  to  prove 
that  the  covenantor  circumcifion  which  was  put  into  his  flefh, 
and  the  covenant  of  grace  which  was  impre fifed  on  his  heart, 
and  the  two  churches,  are  efientially  the  fame,  arc  without  the 
leaft  foundation.  For  let  it  be  once  granted,  that  Abraham's 
flefh  and  faith  were  efientially  different ;  and  who  can  deny 
that  the  two  covenants  which  anfwered  to  them  were  eflential- 
ly  different — that  the  two  feeds  which  fprang  from  them  are 
effentially  different — the  two  churches  efientially  different  ?  and 
if  the  feed  of  the  fiefh  with  its  church  ftate  was  caft  out  upon 
the  coming  of  Chrift,  I  fay  again,  that  all  footing  for  the  natu- 
ral feed  of  believers,  as  fuch,  in  the  vifible  church,  was  then 
annihilated  forever. 

Again,  the  fame  things  appear  in  the  figure  ;  for  of  necefiity 
we  muft  either  fuppofe  that  there  were  two  different  qualities 
in  the  olive  tree,  or  that  the  apoftle,  in  applying  the  terms  na- 
ture and  faith  to  the  branches,  actually  meant  the  fame  thing. 
But  if  he  did  not  mean  the  fame  thing  by  thofe  terms,  as  is  cer- 
tain, then  the  idea  of  the  two  qualities  in  the  tree,  anfwering 
to  the  flefh  and  faith  of  Abraham,  and  denominating  the 
branches  natural  and  faithful,  as  figures  of  the  two  feeds,  rnoft 
effectually  deftroys  the  Psedo  Baptift  argument  drawn  from  the 
onenefs  of  the  tree,  for  the  famenefs  of  the  two  churches.  The 
breaking  off  of  fome  of  the  branches,  and  the  grafting  in  of 
others,  the  reader  will  find  explained  in  another  place. 

Thus,  if  Abraham  were  intended  by  the  root  and  the  olive 
tree,  or  rather  the  flock  of  the  olive  tree,  as  upon  the  whole  is 
evident,  and  the  idea  be  applied  to  the  Jewifh  church,  it  muft 
be  explained  of  Kim  only  as  a  father  in  the  fiefh,  agreeable  to 
the  tenor  of  the  firft  covenant ;  but  if  it  be  applied  to  the  gof- 
pel  church,  it  muft  be  explained  of  him  as  a  father  in  faith,  ac- 
cording to  the  nature  and  plan  of  the  new  covenant ;  and  the 
idea  of  holinefs  as  applied  both  to  the  root  and  branches  muft 
l>e  explained  accordingly,  that  is  to  fay,  of  tfoe  Jewifla  leg*! 


[  21  ] 

holinefs,  or  of  the  moral  holinefs  of  believers.  And  indeed, 
all  thefe  figures  and  paffages  are  to  be  explained  by  the  doc- 
trine of  the  two  covenants  as  the  ground-work,  laid  down  in 
feveral  parts  of  the  facred  volume. 

According  to  Mr.  E/s  argument,  for  a  transfer  of  the  fame 
kingdom  from  the  Jews  to  the  Gentiles,  when  John  the  Bap- 
tift  and  our  Saviour  came  preaching,  they  ought  not  to  have 
faid,  "  Repent,  for  the  kingdom  of  God  or  of  heaven  is  at 
hand  ;"  but  repent,  for  a  new  form,  or  a  new  drgfs,  as  he  elfe-  <cw*>^ 
where  terms  it,  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand.  For  cer-  t***^ 
tainly,  if  the  Jews  had  been  in  pofTefiion  of  the  fame  kingdom 
from  Abraham's  time  down  to  that  period,  it  muft  have  been 
abfurd  and  inconfiftent  to  tell  them,  that  it  was  then  juft  about 
to  take  place ;  but  I  fhall  fay  no  more  upon  this  point  at 
prefent. 

Although  I  confider  my  argument  as  fufficiently  fupported 
without  the  addition  of  another  word  ;  yet,  there  are  two  or 
three  particulars  related  in  fcripture,  which,  as  natural  confe- 
quences  of  what  has  been  laid  down,  will  ferveto  aflift  the  rea- 
der greatly  in  examining  the  fubjecl:. 

The  firft  is,  that  immediately  upon  the  opening  of  the  gofpel 
difpenfation,  that  peculiar  diftin&ion  which,  by  the  command 
of  God,  had  been  fo  long  kept  up  between  the  Jews  and  Gen- 
tiles, was  by  the  fame  authority  obliterated.  All  the  rites  and 
ceremonies  of  Judaifm,  except  in  a  typical  way,  became  entire- 
ly ufelefs.  Circumcilion  was  nothing,  and  uncircumcifion  was 
nothing  ;  and  the  unbelieving  Jews,  with  all  their  religious  at- 
tainments, were  confidered,  with  reference  to  the  gofpel  pro- 
mife,  on  the  felf-same  footing  with  the  unbelieving  Jews.  This  VF**'  *" 
indeed,  according  to  what  has  been  laid  down,  had  alway  s  * 
been  the  cafe ;  for  as  the  covenant  on  which  the  church  was 
founded,  of  which  they  had  been  members,  was  not  the  gof- 
pel covenant,  they  were  never  confidered  as  being  any  more 
entitled  to  the  fpiritual  bleffings  annexed  to  Abraham's  faith, 


[         22         ] 

than  Iflimael  was  to  the  hcirfhip  of  Ifaac ;  but  now  the  matte!1 
was  made  vifible. 

It  is  true  that  the  apoftle  reckons  fome  advantage  to  them  ; 
but  that  was  only  of  the  letter  kind,  and  con  lifted  chiefly  in 
the  means  of  information,  and  was  the  fame  to  them  in  propor- 
tion as  that  which  all  unbelievers  now  poflels,  who  have  the 
letter  of  revelation,  when  compared  with  thofe  who  have  it 
not.  But  if  the  fcripture  have  given  any  pre-eminence  to  ei-» 
ther  of  their  general  characters  as  unbelievers,  the  Gentiles  cer- 
tainly have  it :  "I  was  found  of  them  that  fought  me  not ;  I 
was  made  manifeft  unto  them  that  afked  not  after  me."  But 
to  Ifrael  he  faith,  "  All  day  long  have  I  ftretched  forth  my 
hands  unto  a  difobedient  and  gain  faying  peGple." 

The  apoftle,  directly  after  ftating  this  advantage,  has  put 
the  queftion,  and  anfwered  it  himfelf,  Rom.  iii.  9.  "  "What  then, 
are  we  better  than  they  ?  No,  in  n  o  wife :  for  we  have  before 
proved  both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  that  they  are  all  under  fin." 
We  find  the  like  alfo  in  chap.  xi.  32.  "  For  God  hath  con- 
cluded them  all  in  unbelief/'  And  in  Gal.  iii.  22.  "  But  the 
fcripture  hath  concluded  all  under  fin." 

We  again  obferve,  fecondly,  That  with  regard  to  gofpel 
characters  and  rights,  the  fcripture  has  made  no  difference  be- 
tween Jewifh  and  Gentile  believers  ;  for  it  faith,  "  That  God 
is  no  refpecter  of  perfons  :  "But  in  every  nation  he  that  feareth 
him,  and  worketh  righteouftiefs,  is  accepted  with  him."  "  And 
put  no  difference  between  us  and  them,  purifying  their  hearts 
by  faith." — Acts  x.  34,  35,  and  xv.  9.  "  The  righteoufnefs  of 
God  which  is  by  faith  of  Jefus  Chrift  unto  all,  and  upon  all 
them  that  believe  ;  for  there  is  no  difference."  "  For  there  is 
no  difference  between  the  Jew  and  the  Greek  ;  for  the  fame 
Lord  over  all  is  rich  unto  all  that  call  upon  him." — Rom.  iii. 
22,  and  x.  12.  "  There  is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek,  for  ye  are 
all  one  in  Chrift  Jefus." — Gal.  iii.  28.     See  alfo  ColofT.  iii.  1 1. 

We  obferve,  tfcirdly,  That  the  gofpel,  in  its  manner  of  ad- 


[  2S  J 

drefs  to  mankind  in  general,  is  founded  upon  thefe  two  por- 
tions, and  particularly  accommodated  to  them.  How  exadt 
were  the  difcourfes  of  John  the  Baptift,  though  in  the  twilight, 
juft  emerging  from  the  fhades  of  Judaifm.  Setting  afide  the 
plea  of  the  Pharifees  and  Sadducees  upon  the  ground  of  car- 
nal defcent,  he  urges  the  firft  article  of  his  million  with  all  his 
might — "  Repent,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand." 
*'  Who  hath  warned  you  to  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come?" 
What  aukward,  unlkilful  melTenger  hath  pretended ly  been  to 
point  out  to  you  the  way  of  falvation  through  the  Meffiah  ; 
to  direct  you  to  his  kingdom,  and  fend  you  to  my  baptifm 
without  prev  bully  infilling  upon  your  repentance  ?  No ! 
"  bring  forth  fruits  meet  for  repentance,"  and  indulge  not  the 
thought  for  a  moment,  that  Abraham  is  your  father  ;  for  by 
the  power  of  God  thefe  Gentiles  about  you  will  rife  up  in  the 
ftrength  of  Abraham's  faith,  and  cry  out  againft  your  unbelief 
and  impenitence,  and  according  to  the  title  granted  in  that  line* 
take  poiTeffion  of  the  Meffiah's  kingdom,  while  you,  as  fruitlefs. 
trees,  will  be  digged  up  by  the  roots,  and  no  longer  allowed  a 
(landing  in  the  vifible  church  in  the  world. 

And  thus  again,  the  apoftle  Paul,  in  the  clear  light  of  the 
morning,  when  the  lhadows  were  quite  difperfed :  "We  preach 
Chrift  crucified,  unto  the  Jews  a  Humbling  block,  and  unto 
the  Greeks  fooliflmefs  ;  but  unto  them  which  are  called,  both 
Jews  and  Greeks,  Chrift  the  power  of  God,  and  the  wifdom 
of  God." 

We  mall  now  enquire  fomevyhat  into  the  views  which  the 
different  parties  had  of  thefe  things,  and  how  they  operated 
upon  their  feelings. 

To  the  carnal  Jews  they  were  a  Humbling  block,  as  expref- 
fed  in  the  paflage  laft  quoted.  They  had  ever  fuppofed,  that 
the  Meffiah  would  come  in  the  pomp  and  fplendour  of  an  earth- 
ly prince,  to  raife  them  to  temporal  power  and  dominion  over 
the  nations.    But  when  he  actually  came,  his  appearance  and 


[  24  ] 

manners  indicated  directly  the  reverfe.  They  evidently  faw, 
that  his  doctrine  was  calculated  to  fubvert  their  old  argument 
of  being  the  heirs  of  the  promife  becaufe  they  were  the  feed  of 
Abraham,  and  gave  encouragement  to  the  Gentiles  ;  and  hence 
they  were  terribly  alarmed  with  the  apprehenfion  of  a  change 
which  might  prove  the  ruin  of  their  church  and  nation,  and 
eftablifh  the  uncircumcifed  heathens  in  their  place.  They  knew 
nothing  of  the  nature  of  Abraham's  faith,  nor  of  the  fpiritual 
feeti  in  distinction  from  themfeives,  and  therefore  ftuck  to  the 
point  like  herpes,  that  they,  as  the  c©ly  feed,  muft  have  an  in- 
difputable  title  to  the  inheritance  promifed  to  their  firft  father ; 
and  their  feelings  were  roufed  to  indignation  and  envy — yea, 
by  degrees  they  became  defperate  and  outrageous. 

Once,  when  the  blefTed  Saviour  declared  to  them  the  real 
truth,  that  they  were  in  a  ftate  of  bondage — were  not  the  chil- 
dren of  Abraham,  nor  of  God,  but  the  children  of  the  wicked 
one,  as  their  characters  verified,  they  malicicufly  retaliated,  that 
he  was  a  Samaritan  and  had  a  devil.  And  at  another  time, 
when  he  had  but  ftated  two  fimple  facts  which  flood  on  record 
in  their  own  hiftory,  That  God  had  mercifully  vilited  two  dif- 
treffed  characters  among  the  Gentiles,  while  many  in  fimilar 
circumftances  in  Ifrael  were  pafled  by  ;  they  "  were  filled  with 
wrath,  and  rofe  up  and  thrufl  him  out  of  the  city,  and  led  him 
unto  the  brow  of  the  hill  whereon  their  city  was  built,"  and 
would  have  caft  him  down  headlong,  but  that  he  miraculouf- 
ly  efcaped  their  hands. 

Hence  it  was,  that  they  endeavoured  to  catch  and  entangle 
him  in  his  words,  and  to  get  fomething  out  of  his  mouth  by 
which  they  might  accufe  him  to  the  civil  power ;  and  finally 
upon  this  principle  they  procured  his  condemnation,  and  put 
him  to  the  moft  mameful  and  miferable  of  all  deaths. 

$jad  hence  it  was  alfo,  that  they  were  cut  to  the  heart  by  the 
pleaching  of  Stephen,  and  gnafned  on  him  with  their  teeth ; 
and  in  the  conclufion  "  ran  upon  him  with  one  accord  and 


[  25  ] 

caft  him  out  of  the  city,  and  ftoned  him"  to  death.  It  was 
this  likewife,  which  led  Saul  before  his  converfion  to  perfecute 
the  name  of  Jefus  and  his  people  in  fa  furious  a  manner  ;  and 
afterwards  with  reference  to  this,  he  gives  the  Jews  this  gene- 
ral character,  1  ThefT.  ii.  15, 16.  "  Who  both  killed  the  Lord 
Jefus,  and  their  own  prophets,  and  have  perfecuted  us ;  and  they 
pleafe  not  God,  and  are  contrary  to  all  men  :  Forbidding  us  to 
fpcak  to  the  Gentiles  that  they  might  be  faved,"  &c.  But 
finally,  the  Lord  interpofed  and  fcattered  thefe  natural  branches 
of  the  vifible  church  under  the  law,  into  all  the  nations  of  the 
earth,  for  a  living  admonition  to  ail  men,  that  he  had  rejected 
the  natural  feed  of  Abraham,  as  fuch,  from  being  materials  to 
form  the  vifible  church  under  the  gofpel. 

It  is  now  obfervable,  that  as  all  the  Paedo  Baptift  churches 
in  the  adminiftration  of  baptifm,  have  recourfe  to  the  covenant 
of  circumcifion  for  the  fubject,  they  alfo  have  a  natural  feed 
bearing  the  principal  external  badge  of  Chriftianity,  and  thus 
appropriating  to  themfelves  the  name  of  Chriftians  ;  and  hence 
whole  nations  are  formed  into  churches,  and  nominally  pafs 
under  that  name  and  character ;  but  is  not  this  the  main  pillar 
and  bafe  of  Antichrift's  kingdom  ?  What  is  the  kingdom  of 
Antichrift,  but  a  carnal  flefhly  people,  bearing  the  outward 
marks  and  veftiges  of  Chriftianity,  and  ufurping  to  themfelves 
the  character,  name,  and  rights  of  the  true  people  of  God  ? 
Thefe  have  always  been  the  perfecutors  under  the  gofpel,  for 
they  hate  the  true  heirs  of  the  promife.  They  cannot  endure 
thofe  who  expbfe  their  real  character,  and  deny  their  claim  to 
gofpel  privileges ;  and  hence  fome  writers  have  acknowledged, 
that  when  writing  againft  the  Baptifts  they  Could  hardly  dip 
their  pens  in  any  other  liquor  than  the  juice  of  gall.  Ard 
whoever  has  read  Mr.  E.'s  remarks  upon  Mr.  Booth,  and  the 
Baptifts  in  general,  may  in  feveral  inftances  eafiiy  difcover 
through  the  thin  difguife  of  his  candid  reafons,  fomething  very 
like  the  fpirit  of  Iflimael  perfecuting  Ifaac.    It  is  however  im- 

C 


[  2G  ] 

pofiible  to  determine  how  far  real  Chriftians  may  be  led  aftray 
by  thefe  principles,  and  be  left  to  ac~t  upon  them  ;  and  certain 
it  is,  that  the  true  believers  among  the  Paedo  Baptiftsmuft  juf~ 
tify  the  claims  of  the  carnal  feed,  or  forever  give  up  the  prac- 
tice of  infant  baptifm. 

This  will  lead  us,  on  the  other  hand,  to  notice  a  little  the 
views  and  feelings  which  the  above  ftated  abolition  of  the  dif- 
ference between  the  Jews  and  Gentiles  excited  in  many  of  the 
real  faints  who  were  converted  from  Judaifm.  It  feems,  that 
they  were  extremely  blind  and  ignorant  with  regard  to  this  af- 
fair. Even  Peter,  as  great  an  apoftle  as  he  was,  muft  have  a 
vilion  from  heaven  with  a  particular  explanation,  to  convince 
him  of  the  truth  of  it,  and  to  inform  him  of  its  nature  and  ex- 
tent. And  when  he  attended  upon  the  call  of  Cornelius  the 
centurian,  "  they  of  the  circumcifion  which  believed  were 
aftonifhed,  as  many  as  came  with  him  ;  becaufe  that  on  the 
Gentiles  alfo  was  poured  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghoft." 

And  afterwards,  lc>  when  Peter  was  come  to  Jerufalem,  they 
of  the  circumcifion  contended  with  him,  faying,  thou  wenteft 
in  to  men  uncircumcifcd,  and  didft  eat  with  them."  And  now 
Peter,  to  convince  them  alfo,  muft  relate  the  ftory  of  his  vilion ; 
and  how  that  God  by  his  means  had  given  the  Holy  Ghoft  to 
the  Gentiles.  This  feemed  to  fatisfy  them  for  the  prefent ; 
*'  they  held  their  peace,  and  glorified  God,"  and  rejoiced  for 
their  Gentile  brethren,  "  faying,  then  hath  God  alfo  to  the 
Gentiles  granted  repentance  unto  life." — See  Ads,  x.  and  xl 
chapters, 

But  after  aM  this,  fo  hard  was  it  to  part  with  the  cuftoms 
and  traditions  of  their  fathers,  and  the  notion  that  circumcifion 
and  the  obfervation  of  the  Mofaic  rites  were  neceflary  to  falva- 
tion,  that  many  of  this  clafs  contended  warmly  for  them  under 
the  gofpeL  Their  notion  that  circumcifion  was  necefiary  to 
falvation,  feems  by  the  general  account  to  have  been  founded 
upon  the  opinion,  that  the  covenant  to  which  it  was  annexed, 


[  27  ] 

was  the  covenant  of  grace,  out  of  which  no -man  could  be  com- 
pletely juftified  and  faved  ;  and  in  which,  according  to  Gen. 
xvii.  no  man  could  have  a  ftanding  unlefs  he  were  circumcifed, 
and  therefore  that  circumcifion  muft  have  been  effentially  ne- 
cefiary  to  Abraham  notwithstanding  his  faith  ;  and  if  fo,  why 
not  as  neceffary  to  believers  under  the  gofpel.  According  to 
this,  they  muft  have  fuppofed,  as  Pasdo  Baptifts  now  do,  that 
the  covenant  in  which  Abraham  and  his  natural  feed  held  their 
ftanding  by  circumcifion,  was  effentially  the  fame  with  the  true 
gofpel  covenant ;  and  with  thefe  things  they  plagued  and  har- 
raffed  the  churches  daily,  but  no  body  had  then  found  out,  as 
the  Psedo  Baptifts  have  fince  done,  that  circumcifion  was  fuc- 
ceeded  by  baptifm. 

From  thefe  things  it  was  that  the  difpute  about  circumcifion 
originated,  which  was  decided  by  the  council  at  Jerufalem,  as 
recorded  in  the  xv.  chap,  of  Acls.  And  hence  alio  it  was,  that 
the  apoftle  Paul  in  the  moft  of  his  epiftles,  as  has  been  noted, 
efpecially  thofe  to  the  Romans,  Galatians,  and  Hebrews,  enter- 
ed fo  minutely  and  particularly  into  this  fubject,  reafoning  and 
difputing  againft  the  neceffity  of  incorporating  the  rites  of  Ju- 
daifm  with  the  inftitutions  of  the  gofpel. 

In  the  iv.  chap,  to  the  Rom.  he  fhews  in  the  cleareft  light, 
that  Abraham  had  his  faith,  and  that  God  had  reckoned  it  to 
him  for  righteoufnefs ;  and  of  courfe  that  he  was  completely 
juftified,  and  held  his  title  to  eternal  life  in  full,  before  ever  he 
was  circumcifed.  So,  that  when  he  received  circumcifion,  it 
could  not  be  as  a  part  of  juftifying  righteoufnefs,  or  a  neceflary 
article  to  falvation  ;  but  only  as  a  feal,  or  a  token  annexed  to 
his  righteoufnefs,  by  which  it  might  be  known  that  he  was  in 
pofiTeflion  of  the  promifes  till  they  ihould  be  fulfilled. 

Now,  here  we  fhould  obferve,  that  there  were  two  promifes 
made  to  Abraham,  according  to  the  nature  and  defign  of  the 
two  covenants.  The  firft  (that  is,  the  firft  in  being,  though 
not  in  vifibility,)  reflected  the  general  idea  of  the  coining  of 


[  28  ] 

Chrift,  and  of  the  operations  of  his  fpirit  and  grace  in  the  fal- 
vation  of  fouls ;  and  no  doubt  there  were  many,  we  know  that 
there  were  fome,  who  at  the  fame  time  received  this  promife 
by  faith,  as  well  as  Abraham,  and  this  was  alfo  to  extend  to  all 
the  nations  of  the  earth. 

The  fecond  refpected  the  coming  of  Chrift  in  the  flefh,  in 
fome  particular  line  of  defcent.  For  though  all  the  faints,  in 
and  before  Abraham's  time,  firmly  believed  that  a  Saviour 
would  come  into  the  world,  yet  of  whofe  feed  among  them  all 
he  were  to  come,  they  could  not  tell.  But  when  it  was  pro- 
mifed  Abraham  that  he  fhould  come  of  his  feed,  though  every 
thing  in  nature  feemed  to  be  againft  it,  yet  he  ftaggered  not  at 
the  promife  of  God,  but  was  ftrong  in  faith,  giving  glory  to 
God  ;  and  it  is  eafy  to  fee,  that  this  promife  could  not  extend 
to  any  other  believer  at  the  time,  nor  ever  afterwards  to  any 
perfon  whatever  beyond  the  limits  of  his  natural  pofterity,  or 
at  leaft  the  bounds  of  the  Jewifn  church.  And  in  allufion  to 
the  manner  in  which  earthly  governments  affix  their  feals  to 
public  inftruments,  teftimonies,  declarations,  &c.  that  their 
validity  mould  not  be  queftioned,  the  apoftle  conliders  circum- 
cifion  in  this  cafe,  as  the  feal  of  heaven  annexed  to  the  righte- 
oufnefs  of  Abraham's  faith  ;  and  in  this  light  it  was  held  up  to 
all  the  faints,  and  even  to  others,  as  a  fure  fign  or  token  be- 
tween God  and  Abraham,  that  notwithftanding  the  weaknefs 
of  nature,  yet  the  promife  mould  not  fail  of  accomplifhment  ; 
for  it  was  only  in  this  way  that  others  were  to  be  blelTed  in  A- 
braham,  or  in  his  feed. 

We  can  now  fee  to  an  exaclnefs,  that  there  was  nothing  here 
which  rendered  the  faith  or  righteoufnefs  of  Abraham  different 
from  that  of  other  believers  who  were  never  circumcifed  ;  for 
the  limple  amount  of  the  whole  is  this,  That  before  this  pro- 
mife was  made,  all  the  faints,  together  with  Abraham,  believ- 
ed that  a  faviour  would  come  in  the  flefh.  After  the  promife 
was  made,  Abraham,  and  all  who  had  the  knowledge  of  it,  be- 


C  2$  ] 

lieved  that  he  would  come  of  bis  flefh.  Now,  we  believe  that 
he  has  come  in  his  flefh.  The  only  point  then  in  which  he  dif- 
fered from  the  reft  was,  that  he  was  felected  from  amongft  them 
by  God  for  that  fpecial  purpofe,  and  with  reference  that  as  the 
principal  object  was  circumcifion  given  him ;  but  if  his  flefh 
Was  the  fame  in  nature  with  the  reft,  it  is  altogether  immateri- 
al to  true  faith,  whether  he  had  defcended  from  one  or  another/ 
if  God  had  feen  fit.  The  fame  difficulties  alfo  attended  the 
Faith  of  others,  which  attended  his  ;  for  it  required  as  ftrong 
faith  in  others  to  believe,  that  Abraham,  at  an  hundred  years 
old,  and  Sarah,  at  ninety,  mould  have  a  fon  born  to  them,  as- 
it  did  in  Abraham  to  believe  it  himfelf ;  and  the  fame  rule  will 
apply  to  believers  now  with  regard  to  crediting  the  account. 

Thus  it  appears,  that  this  feal  in  Abraham's  flefh  was  defign- 
ed  as  the  diftinguiihing  characteriftic,  evidence,  or  fign  *  to  all 
believers ;  and  even  to  all  nations,  that  the  Saviour,  according 
to  the  flefh,  fhould  have  his  defcent  from  him  ;  and  hence  it 
was  entailed  on  his  pofterity,  and  gave  rife  to  their  civil  polity 
as  a  nation,  and  to  their  inftitutions  as  a  church,  until  he  actu- 
ally came.  But  when  Chrift  appeared  in  the  flefh,  the  ufe  of 
this  fign  or  feal  was  entirely  at  an  end  y  for  the  promife  being 
fulfilled,  the  whole  deiign  for  which  that  people  had  been  dif- 
tinguifhed,  both  as  a  nation  and  a  church,  was  anfwered  ;  and 
therefore  Chrift  is  faid  to  have  abolifhed  the  whole  difpenfation 
in  his  flefh,  Eph.  ii.  15.  "  Having  abolifhed  in  his  flefh,  the 
enmity,  even  the  law  of  commandments  contained  in  ordi- 

*  And  he  received  the  sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal,  &c.  Some  of 
my  brethren  explain  the  sign  here  of  the  antitype  of  circumcision,  viz. 
the  circumcision  of  the  heart,  and  I  have  been  inclined  to  that 
opinion  myself;  but  I  find  an  insuperable  difficulty  attending  it. 
For,  1.  It  is  certain,  that  the  sign  and  seal  were  the  same  :  He  re- 
ceived the  sign — a  seal,  &c.  2.  It  is  evident,  that  the  thing  sealed, 
■»iz.  the  righteousness  of  Abraham's  faith,  must  have  existed  before 
it  was  sealed ;  but  how  could  Abraham  have  faith,  before  he  was 
circumcised  in  heart  ? 

C  2 


I  30  ] 

nances,"  &e.  It  is  alio  reprefented,  as  being  crucified  with 
him— blotted  out — and  removed  out  of  the  way,  by  his  filter- 
ing and  death  in  the  flefli,  fee  C0I01T.  ii.  14,  and  until  this  was 
done,  he  could  not  make  of  twain,  that  is  of  Jews  and  Gentiles, 
one  new  man,  or  new  church  in  unity  and  peace. 

But  to  return — There  was  nothing  which  the  apoftle  met 
with  in  propagating  the  gofpel,  which  feemedto  try  his  patience 
fo  much  as  this  controverfy.  He  admonifhed. — He  rebuked. 
— He  exhorted. — He  reafbned  with  his  brethren  upon  the  point. 
He  confidered  thofe  who  troubled  them  with  it,  as  perverters 
of  the  gofpel ;  and  fometimes  wifhed  that  they  were  even  cut 
oiu  Yet  notwithstanding  all,  the  principle  prevailed  ;  and  in 
a  few  ages  after  circumcifion  was  metamorphofed  into  baptifm, 
or  baptifm  made  to  anfwer  the  ancient  ufe  of  circumcifion  ;. 
and  the  infant  children  of  believers,  as  fubjeds,  were  fabftitut- 
ed  in  the  place  of  believing  fons  and  daughters,  and  the  church 
in  general  modelled  after  the  plan  of  the  old  Jewifh  covenant, 
and  thus  it  continues  with  multitudes  to  this  day. 

But  the  great  argument  which  fo  invincibly  cuts  its  way  in 
oppontion  to  fcripture,  is  doubtles  the  natural  affe&ion  which 
parents  have  for  their  children.  It  is  this  in  connection  with 
their  old  traditions,  which  blinds  their  minds,  and  perverts  their 
judgment  with  regard  to  the  truth  of  the  cafe ;  and  therefore 
to  deny  them  a  right  to  baptifm,  and  rank  them  with  the  car- 
nal world,  often  moves  their  feelings  next  to  an  attempt  to  de- 
ilroy  them,  Psedo  Baptift  writers  are  fenfible  of  this,  and  hence 
fome  endeavour  to  get  poffeffion  of  the  people's  paflions,  by 
reprefenting  the  Baptift's  principles  and  practice,  as  extremely 
cruel  to  little  children  ;  and  in  this  way  to  carry  their  argu- 
ment with  them.  Thus  one,  when  writing  againft  a  Baptift 
author,  "  The  book  fpeaks  with  the  voice  of  a  lamb,  but  he 
ac?ts  the  caufe  of  a  roaring  lion,  who  by  ail  crafty  ways  feeketh 
to  devour  the  poor  lambs  of  the  flock  of  Chrift."*    And  thus 

*  Elliot's  answer  to  Norcoit, 


[  31  ] 

another,  "  The  church  was  always  fond  of  her  children  ;  and 
can  we  now  without  horror  indulge  the  thought,  either  that 
Chrift  hath  caft  them  off,  or  that  the  church  is  become  as  cruel 
as  the  oftrich  ?"*  A  third  charges  the  Baptifts  with  being  guil- 
ty of  pronouncing  "  a  rafh  and  bloody  fentence,  condemning 
infants  as  out  of  the  ftate  of  grace  ;  condemning  all  the  infants 
of  the  whole  church  of  Chrift  as  having  nothing  to  do  with  the 
covenant  of  grace  ;  and  affirms,  that  their  conducl  exceeds  the 
cruelty  of  Herod  and  Hazael  in  flaying  and  dafhing  the  infants 
of  Ifrael  againft  the  wall."f 

Pitiful  complaints  thefe.  But  they  hate  a  very  ancient  and 
venerable  example  for  them,  from  a  character  no  lefs  famous, 
and  worthy  of  imitation,  than  the  father  of  the  faithful  himfelf. 
When  Sarah  faid  unto  Abraham,  "  Caft  out  the  bond-woman, 
and  her  fon  ;  for  the  fon  of  this  bond-woman  mall  not  be  heir 
with  my  fon,  even  with  Ifaac,"  "  The  thing  was  very  grievous 
in  Abraham's  fight,  becaufe  of  his  fon."  It  doubtlefs  feemed 
hard,  and  cruel ;  nor  would  he  confent  to  it  till  the  Lord  came 
in  as  umpire  to  fettle  the  difpute  between  them,  and  faid  unto 
Abraham,  "  Let  it  not  be  grievous  in  thy  light,  becaufe  of  the 
lad,  and  becaufe  of  thy  bond-woman  ;  in  all  that  Sarah  hath 
faid  unto  thee,  hearken  unto  her  voice  ;  for  in  Ifaac  fhall  thy 
feed  be  called."  Such  was  the  voice  of  Sarah  then,  and  fuch 
the  voice  of  the  free  woman  or  the  true  church  now.  Such 
the  general  voice  of  the  Baptifts  ;  and  grievous  as  it  is  to  ma- 
ny believing  parents,  the  declaration  of  the  New  Teftament,  as 
we  have  feen,  is  as  plainly  againft  them,  as  was  the  teftimony 
of  God  againft  Abraham  ;  and  well  would  it  be  for  them,  if 
like  Abraham  they  would  at  laft  fubmit  to  it. 

I  will  now  put  my  argument  into  a  form,  In  which  the  rea- 
der may  realize  its  whole  force  at  once.  If  the  premifes  from 
which  I  infer  that  infants  mould  not  be  baptized,  be  good? 
then  the  inference  itfelf  is  good,  and  infants  ought  not  to  be 

*  FUh  on  Bap.  f  Mr*  Marshall. 


[  32  ] 

baptized.  The  premifes  confift  of  four  parts.  Firft— that  A* 
braham  had  really  two  feeds.  Secondly — that  thefe  two  feeds 
were  actually  diftinguimed  by  the  different  appellations  of  flefh 
and  promife,  or  as  being  flefhly,  and  fpiritual.  Thirdly— that 
they  were  thus  diftinguiflied,  not  as  adults  only,  but  even  in 
their  births,  and  in  their  mothers  which  bare  them ;  and  of 
courfe  the  diftinclion  muft  neceflarily  involve  their  infantile 
ftate.  Fourthly — that  the  children  of  the  flefh  were  exprefsly 
prohibited  from  being  heirs  with  the  fpiritual  feed,  by  a  pofitive 
command  to  exclude  them  from  the  vifible  church. 

Now  if  all  the  arguments,  and  pafTages  of  fcripture  which  I 
have  brought  to  prove  thefe  four  particulars,  do  actually  prove 
them  ;  then  the  premifes  are  invincibly  eftablifhed,  the  infer* 
ence  is  good,  and  every  argument  which  Mr.  E.  has  advanced, 
or  which  ever  was,  or  ever  can  be  advanced  in  favour  of  infant 
baptifm,  is  anfwered  in  the  moft  decifive  manner. 

Mr.  E.  will  now  find  himfelf  in  as  terrible  a  dilemma  as  he 
fuppofed  he  had  placed  the  Baptifts.  He  fays,  p.  34,  "  but  if 
they  (that  is,  infants)  were  excluded,  it  muft  be  done,  either 
exprefsly  or  implicitly.*'  Now  feveral  of  the  fcriptures  I  have 
produced  are  exprefs,  except  in  the  terms  infants,  church, 
memberfhip,  &c.  but  the  two  laft  will  not  be  difputed ;  all  refts 
upon  the  queftion,  whether  the  children  of  the  flefh  were  ob- 
jected againft  as  fuch,  or  as  infants  ;  and  Mr.  E.  has  ufed  the 
term  throughout  his  whole  book  in  fuch  a  manner,  that  he  can 
avoid  the  force  of  every  pafTage  of  fcripture  brought  againft 
him  by  faying,  as  occafion  may  require,  that  it  does  not  relate 
to  infants  ;  and  upon  this  principle  the  following  paflTage  feems 
to  be  founded  in  the  page  above  quoted,  "  there  is  no  exprefs 
exclufion  of  infants  in  all  the  fcriptures." 

But  the  moment  he  in  lifts  upon  exprefs  terms  here,  he  will 
find  himfelf  completely  in  the  very  fame  manacles  in  which  he 
fuppofes  he  has  got  Mr.  B.  with  regard  to  women's  com* 
njunion.    For  if,  as  he  fays,  Mr.  B.  was  inconfiftent  in  affirm- 


C      S3      3 

ing,  that  becaufe  baptifm  is  a  pofitive  inftitution,  the  fubje&s 
of  it  muft  be  exprefsly  denominated,  while  he  himfelf  admitted 
fubje&s  to  another  pofitive  inftitution  which  were  not  mention- 
ed m  an  exprefs  manner  ;  he  would  be  juft  as  inconfiftent  to 
affirm,  that  infant  baptifm  may  be  proved  without  any  exprefs 
command,  or  example,  and  yet  deny  that  it  can  be  difproved 
without  an  exprefs  prohibition ;  and  thus  his  "  Short  Method" 
with  the  Baptifts  would  fuddenly  be  turned  into  a  fhort  method 
with  himfelf,  and  the  pit  which  he  has  digged  for  his  neighbour 
would  become  his  own  grave.  And  if  he  admits  of  implicit 
proof  upon  juft  grounds,  he  is  certainly  gone  ;  for  the  principal 
evidence  in  his  premifes,  that  the  children  of  Abraham  were 
circumcifed  in  their  infancy,  is  the  circumftance  of  their  being 
eight  days  old ;  and  the  objection  in  my  premifes  lies  againft 
the  natural  feed,  as  children  of  the  fiefh,  from  their  mothers 
womb  ;  fo  that,  at  all  events,  he  cannot  find  in  his  premifes  a 
command  to  take  them  into  the  vifible  church  in  Abraham's 
family  at  an  earlier  period  of  life,  than  I  have  found  one  in  mine 
to  exclude  them  from  the  vifible  church  under  the  gofpel. 
No  room  is  left  here  to  criticife  about  infants,  for  the  firft  part 
of  the  dilemma  could  allow  of  nothing  fhort  of  the  exprefs 
term  ;  and  with  regard  to  the  latter  part,  it  would  be  entirely 
needlefs.  The  terms  generally  ufed  in  fcripture  with  reference 
to  the  feeds  are,  man-child,  children,  fon,  feed,  &c.  and  in  the 
New  Teftament  their  different  characteriftics  are  molt  com- 
monly annexed.  The  fame  rule  will  follow  with  regard  to  the 
terms  memberfhip  and  church ;  for  they  are  no  more  in  his 
premifes  than  in  mine  ;  and  therefore  the  iv.  chap,  to  the  Gal. 
contains  as  exprefs,  and  pofitive  a  command  for  the  exclufion 
of  the  infant  feed  of  believers  from  the  vifible  gofpel  church,  as 
the  xvii.  chap,  of  Gen.  does  for  their  reception  into  the  Jew- 
ifn  church.  The  term  infants  is  once  ufed  in  the  New  Tefta- 
ment in  fuch  a  manner,  that  Mr.  E.  might  think  to  avail  him- 


[  34  ] 

felf  of  it  in  a  cafe  like  the  above  ;  but  it  has  in  facl  no  relation 
to  any  fuch  thing. 

Since  I  have  proceeded  thus  far,  I  will  go  on  as  by  a  kind  of 
inferences  from  what  has  been  laid  down,  to  expofe  in  particu- 
lar the  fallacy  of  fome  of  the  molt  capital  of  Mr.  E.'s  argu- 
ments. And,  1.  It  is  eafy  to  fee  that  the  whole  force  of  his 
"  Short  Method  with  the  Baptffts,"  which  takes  up  about 
twenty  pages  of  his  book,  is  rendered  entirely  void  ;  fince  their 
caufe  can  be  eafily  defended  without  having  recourfe  to  the  ar- 
gument drawn  from  pofitive  inftitution.  I  do  not  however 
mean  to  give  up  that  argument.  I  believe  Mr.  B.  to  be  defen- 
fible ;  but  I  ftand  in  no  need  of  it  at  prefent,  having,  in  my 
humble  opinion,  anfwered  Mr.E.  upon  his  own  plan,  and  (hall 
therefore  fay  no  more  about  it. 

2ndly.  If  what  I  have  laid  down  be  true,  all  the  arguments 
which  Mr.  E.  has  drawn  from  Mat.  xxi.  43,  Rom.  xi.  23,  24, 
and  xi.  17,  and  Eph.  ii.  14,  in  proof  of  his  general  ftatement, 
that  the  church  memberfhip  of  infants  was  never  fet  alide  by 
God,  or  man,  but  continues  in  force  under  the  fan&ion  of  God 
to  the  prefent  day,  and  which  take  up  about  nine  pages  more 
of  his  book,  are.  according  to  his  own  confeilion,  fully  confut- 
ed. For  he  fays,  p.  35,  "  If  a  law  could  be  found  in  the  New 
Teftament,  to  repeal  that  which  had  been  eftablifhed  under  the 
old,  I  grant  freely,  that  all  that  has  been  faid  on  the  four  places 
of  fcripture,  would  fignify  nothing  j"  and  he  prefently  adds, 
"  I  need  not  prove  to  a  Baptift,  that  the  New  Teftament  con- 
tains no  law  by  which  infant  membermip  is  prohibited  ;" — he 
readily  grants  it.  But  this  is  quite  too  bold  an  afiertion.  Mr. 
E.  had  never  feen  half  the  Baptifts  in  the  world ;  and  as  infig- 
nificant  as  I  am  among  the  number,  I  have  found  a  law  in  the 
New  Teftament  as  exprefsly  prohibiting  their  memberlhip,  as 
he  has  found  one  to  eftablifh  it  under  the  old. 

But  T  meet  with  two  or  three  things  in  the  courfe  of  hisrea- 
foning  from  thefe  paflages,  which  I  wiih  to  take  fome  notice  of. 


[  35  ] 

In  page  29,  he  fays,  "  Much  light  might  be  thrown  on  this  fub- 
ject  by  confidering  thofe  prophecies  which  relate  to  the  calling 
in  of  the  Gentiles.  This  Dr.  Williams  has  done  to  great  ad- 
vantage." Were  that  one  prophecy  however  which  ftands  on 
record  in  the  xxxii.  chap,  of  Deut.  and  2 lit  ver.  orastheapol- 
tle  has  quoted  it,  Rom.  x.  19,  "1  will  provoke  you  to  jealoufy 
by  them  which  are  no  people,  and  by  a  foolifh  nation  I  will 
anger  you,"  explained  in  its  true  fenfe,  it  would  give  the  death 
wound  to  Mr.  E.'s  whole  fcheme  in  a  moment.  Like  a  two- 
edged  fword,  it  would  cut  bath  ways,  and  give  a  deadly  thruft 
forward,  as  I  mall  have  occafion  to  mow  by  and  by. 

His  argument  that  the  Jewifh  and  Chriftian  church  are  efTen- 
tially  the  fame,  gives  him  indeed  a  peculiar  advantage  in  the 
explanation  of  fcripture.  He  can  explain  thefe  paflages  which 
relate  to  the  Old  Teftament  church,  of  the  new ;  and  thofe 
which  relate  to  the  New  Teftament  church,  of  the  old  ;  and 
all  the  compound  pafTages  of  either  as  he  pleafes.  He  can  call 
the  Jewifh  church,  the  Chriftian  church  ;  and  the  Chriftian 
church,  the  Jewifh  church.  He  can  call  the  children  of  the 
flelh,  the  children  of  the  promife  ;  and  the  children  of  the  pro-* 
mife,  the  children  of  the  flefh.  He  can  explain  circumcifion, 
of  baptifm ;  and  baptifm  of  circumcifion ;  and  if  he  keeps  his 
expolition  of  any  paflage  in  either  of  the  Teftaments  in  con- 
formity to  theie  bounds,  he  cannot  well  mifs  the  mark,  for  both 
are  efTentially  the  iame. 

The  fact  however  is,  that  by  thus  varying,  changing  and 
mifapplying  fcripture,  or  as  the  prophet  fays,  "  putting  light 
for  darknefs,  and  darknefs  for  light,"  or  mixing  both  together, 
his  linfey-woolfey  reafoning  may  becloud  the  minds  of  a  multi- 
tude of  readers.  And  indeed,  his  whole  book  affords  a  remark- 
able fpecimen  of  this  kind  of  reafoning,  from  which  it  is  evident 
that  he  never  underftood  the  true  ground-work  of  the  Baptift 
fyftem,  that  is  to  fay,  the  proper  distinction  between  the  two* 
covenants,  feeds,  privileges,  &c>    Where  he  has  contrafted  Mi> 


C  56  ] 

B.  and  the  Bible,  and  made  Mr.  B.  to  fay  one  thing,  and  the 
Bible  another;  he  has,  in  my  view,  applied  the  Bible  as  abfurd- 
ly  as  the  llth  and  12th  verfes  of  the  xci.  pfalm  were  applied 
to  our  Saviour  on  the  pinnacle  of  the  Temple,  though  I  muft 
confefs  it  is  almoft  as  plaufible. 

The  next  thing  I  fhall  notice,  is  what  he  has  faid  of  the 
change  in  the  church  under  the  gofpel.     His  infilling  that  the 
church  is  efientially  the  fame  under  both  difpenfations,  and  yet 
the  gofpel  holding  up  fo  clearly  the  idea  of  a  change,  obliges 
him  to  explain  it  only  of  the  rituals  of  the  church.    Thus  he 
fays,  p.  SO :  "  Rituals  are  to  a  church,  as  diet  or  ornament  are 
to  a  man:  let  the  diet  be  changed,  and  the  ornaments  remov- 
ed, the  effence  of  the  man  will  be  ftill  the  fame."     This  is  the 
fubftance  of  all  that  he  has  faid  upon  this  point ;  but  what  fhall 
we  think  of  it  ?  Were  the  trees  which  were  cut  down,  and  the 
children  of  the  kingdom  who  were  caft  out,  the  rituals  of  the 
church  ?  Was  the  fon  of  the  bond-woman,  or  the  feed  of  the 
fiefh,  the  rituals  of  the  church?  Were  the  natural  branches 
which  were  broken  off,  the  old  rituals ;  and  the  feed  of  the 
promife,  or  the  branches  which  were  grafted  in  by' faith,  the 
new  rituals  of  the  church?    If  fo,  let  us  read  a  little.    Well, 
becaufe  of  unbelief,  they  (that  is,  the  old  rituals)  were  broken 
off;  and  thou  (that  is,  a  new  ritual)  ftandeft  by  faith.     Be  not 
new  ritual  high-minded,  but  fear :  for  if  God  fpared  not  the 
old  rituals,  take  heed  left  he  alfo  fpare  not  thee,  that  is,  the 
new.    Strange  reafoning  this!   But  Mr.  E.  perhaps,  would  fay 
to  me,  "  You  do  not  underftand  it — The  meaning  here  is  this : 
The  unbelieving  Jews  with  their  children  were  broken  off,  and 
the  believing  Gentiles  with  their  children  were  grafted  in." 
But  I  mould  reply,  I  do  underftand  it ;  for  the  truth  is,  that 
the  unbelieving  children  with  their  unbelieving  parents,  and  th£ 
unbelieving  children  of  believing  parents,  all  the  natural  feed 
as  fuch,  from  the  oldeft  to  the  youngeft,  were  broken  off;  and 
the  believing  children;  with  their  believing  parents,  and  .the  be- 


[  37  ] 

lieving  children  of  unbelieving  parents,  ftill  flood ;  yet  not  in 
their  Jewifh  capacity,  but  as  children  of  the  free-woman,  to 
make  up  a  part  of  the  vifible  church  under  the  gofpel ;  and  that 
the  believing  Gentiles,  with  their  believing  children,  were  graft- 
ed in  amongft  them.  In  fhort,  the  fimple  meaning  of  the  whole 
is  this:  The  covenant  of  promife  with  all  the  fpiritual  feed  of 
Abraham's  pofterity,  exifted  while  the  law-covenant  with  the 
natural  feed  was  the  groundwork  of  the  vifible  church ;  but 
when  Chrift  came,  the  law-covenant  with  all  the  natural  feed, 
as  fuch,  and  the  rites  and  ceremonies  fuited  to  their  former 
ftanding,  was  ftript  away,  and  left  the  covenant  of  promife  with 
all  the  fpiritual  feed  then  alive,  from  amongft  the  Jews,  ftand- 
ing pure  as  the  foundation  of  the  gofpel  church,  and  ready 
open  to  receive  the  believing  Gentiles,  and  thus  by  faith  they 
entered  in.  But  it  would  be  very  ftrange  indeed,  that  all  the 
natural  feed  of  Abraham,  as  fuch,  mould  be  excluded,  and  yet 
the  natural  feed  of  Gentiles  taken  in.  All  this  is  evident  from 
what  I  have  before  laid  down  ;  but  hereby  the  fophiftry  con- 
tained in  the  3d  particular  of  his  "argument,  taken  from  Rom. 
xi.  17,  and  the  3d  particular  of  that  taken  from  Eph.  ii.  14,  is 
more  clearly  expofed  than  before. 

But  of  all  things  which  I  have  met  in  his  whole  performance, 
the  argument  againft  a  change  in  the  church,  taken  from  the 
filence  of  the  Jews  about  it,  is  the  moft  extraordinary.  He 
fays,  p.  37,  "  That  in  all  the  New  Teftament  we  do  not  read, 
that  they  ever  faid  a  word  about  it,  for  or  againft-  No  prieft  nor 
publican  ;  no  pharifee,  lawyer,  or  libertine ;  neither  pious  nor 
profane;  neither  zealousj  moderate,  or  lukewarm,  in  all  the 
land  of  Ifrael,  oppofe  a  fingle  fentence,  or  alk  a  reafon  why." 
This  is  truly  aftonimiiig  !  So  full  and  palpable  a  contradiction 
to  fome  of  the  plaineft  parts  of  the  New  Teftarnent,  as  coming 
from  the  pen  of  a  profefibr  of  chriftianity,  is  enough  to  make  a 
modeft  perfon  blufh,  and  really  pity  its  author.  I  have  alrea- 
dy proved  the  contrary  by  a  number  of  pafTages  j  but  fince  Mr. 

D 


[  58  ] 

E.  challenges  fact  at  this  rate,  I  will  add  two  or  three  more, 
**  If  we  let  him  thus  alone,  all  men  will  believe  on  him ;  and 
the  Romans  mall  come,  and  take  away  both  our  place  and 
nation." — John  xi.  48.  Though  the  notion  of  change  among 
the  Jews  was  fuited  to  their  notion  of  a  worldly  kingdom  j 
yet  was  not  this  declaration  of  theirs  pointedly  againft  the  doc-* 
trine  and  miracles  of  Jefus  Chrift,  as  tending  to  fubvert  the 
public  faith  in  matters  of  religion  ;  and  fo  to  produce  a  change, 
which  would  eventually  prove  the  ruin  of  their  church  and  na- 
tion ?  They  undoubtedly  faw,  that  the  whole  was  calculated 
to  let  in  the  Gentiles  upon  them,  to  difpofTefs  them  of  their 
religion  and  being  as  a  people,  though  they  underftood  it  rath-, 
er  of  the  force  of  arms,  than  the  power  of  faith  ;  and  hence 
they  thought  it  necefiary  to  arreft  him  in  order  to  prevent  it, 

Again,  did  they  not  fay  of  Stephen,  "  We  have  heard  him 
fpeak  blafphemous  words  againft  Mofes,  and  againft  God." — • 
"  We  have  heard  him  fay,  that  this  Jefus  of  Nazareth  mall 
deftroy  this  place ;  and  (hall  change  the  cuftoms  which  Mofes. 
delivered  us." — A&s  vi.  11,  14.  Mr.  E.  would  probably  fay, 
'*  it  was  the  cuftoms  they  quarrelled  about ;"  but  what  did 
they  mean  by  the  deftruction  of  their  place,  their  holy  place, 
as  they  exprefs  it  in  the  I3thverfe?  Could  it  be  any  thing 
fhort  of  the  deftruction  of  their  city  and  temple,  and  their 
means  and  methods  of  worfhip,  which  would  involve  their  ruin 
as  a  church  and  nation  ;  if  not  the  letting  up  of  another  peo* 
pie  in  their  room  ? 

But  the  prophecy  before  mentioned,  will  come  in  here  with 
its  full  fdrce  :  "  I  will  provoke  you  to  jealoufy  by  them  which 
are  no  people,  and  by  a  foolifh  nation  I  will  anger  you."  Two, 
things  are  obfervable  in  this  pafTage.  1.  The  caufe  or  ground 
of  the  jealoufy — a  work  of  God  agreeable  to  his  own  declara- 
tion, I  will  provoke  you,  &c.  which  work  was  evidently  the 
effecting  of  an  efTential  change  in  the  church  ;  not  a  change  of 
rites  or  cuftoms,  for  thefe  are  never  called  nations,  wife  nor; 


t          S9         ] 

foolifli ;  biit  nothing  lefs  than  the  total  abrogation  of  all  mem- 
herfhip  in  the  vifible  church  upon  the  principle  of  carnal  de- 
fcent,  and  of  courfe  the  expulfion  of  every  gracelefs  Jew,  pa- 
rent or  child,  and  the  bringing  in  of  the  GentilevS  by  faith. 
2.  The  effect  which  this  work  or  change  was  to  produce  upon 
the  carnal  Jews,  viz.  to  provoke  them  to  jealoufy  and  anger* 
and  hence  their  frequent  outrages  againft  Chrift  and  his  gofpel 
at  the  time,  as  I  have  before  fhewn.  And  now,  if  according  to 
Mr.  E.  thefe  were  not  facts,  the  prophecy  could  not  have  been 
true;  but  if  they  were  facts,  his  aflfertion  is  moft  notorioufly 
falfe ;  and  indeed,  an  obferver  will  find  in  almoft  every  part  of 
his  book  the  boldeft  traits  of  arrogance  and  fophiit ry.  He  cavils 
at  Mr.  B.  for  infifting  upon  exprefs  authority  for  infant  bap- 
tifm,  while  a  number  of  his  own  afTertions,  that  fuch  and  fuch 
a  thing  is  fo,  or  not  fo,  were  evidently  made  in  that  pointed 
manner,  becaufe  their  oppofites  are  lacking  of  two  or  three  ex- 
prefs terms  in  fcripture ;  and  this  to  blind  the  eyes  of  his  rea- 
ders, and  lead  them  to  think  that  the  pafiages  which  are  againft 
him,  do  not  relate  to  the  point  he  is  difputing*  I  have  men* 
tioned  this  before  with  regard  to  infants,  and  now  requeft  the 
reader  to  take  more  particular  notice  of  it.  If  this  however  be 
not  a  juft  defcription,  I  muft  claim  the  liberty  of  confefiing, 
that  I  cannot  tell  what  to  make  of  feveral  of  his  prompt  and 
confident  afTertions,  but  bold  and  impudent  falfhoodsi 

Sd.  To  finifh  his  argument,  Mr.E.  goes  on  and  fays,  "  Our 
Lord  and  his  apoftles  take  fpecial  notice  of  infants,  and  inftead 
of  excluding  them,  they  fpeakof  them  as  ftill  pofTefiing  a  right 
to  memberfhip  in  the  church  of  God."  His  proof  of  this  con- 
fifts  of  a  variety  of  remarks  and  inferences  drawn  from  fundry 
pafTages  of  fcripture,  which  take  up  about  thirteen  pages  more 
of  his  book.  The  principal  pafiages  are,  Luke  ix.  47,  48. 
Mark  x.  14.  Acts  ii.  G9.  Now  to  mow  the  reader  how  my 
general  argument  cuts  him  off  here,  I  would  obferve,  that  in- 
ftead of  proving  his  thefis  true,  he  has  actually  laid  Jefus  Chrift 


[  40  J 

in  a  downright  contradiction  and  falfhood.     For  theJTum  of  ail 
he  has  colle&ed  from  the  words  of  Chrift,  is  contained  in  Mark 
x.  14,  and  therefore  in  explaining  that,  we  fhall  explain  the 
whole.    "  Suffer  the  little  children  to  come  unto  me,  and  for- 
bid them  not ;  for  of  fuch  is  the  kingdom  of  ]?fjvefiZ?     Ac- 
cording  to  my  argument,  our  Lord  could  not  in  this  pafiage  re- 
fer to  children,  as  fuch,  or  as  children  in  the  flefh,  who  had 
only  pafTed  through  a  natural  or  carnal  birth  ;  for  if  fo,  when 
he  fays,  "  of  fuch  is  the  kingdom  of  heaxea,"  he  flatly  contra- 
dicts  his   own   afiertions,  John  hi.  3,  5.     "  Except  a  man  be 
born  again,  be  born  of  the  fpirit,  he  cannot  fee — he  cannot  en- 
ter into  the  kingdom  of  God  ;"   and  of  courfe  one  of  them 
muft  be  falfe.     If  it  be  laid  that  the  two  laft  mentioned  pafTages 
do  not  relate  to  infants,  it  will  follow,  either  that  infants  can- 
not be  faved  at  all — or  elfe,  that  they  may  be  faved  without 
being  born  again,  and  confequently  without  the  operations  of 
the  fpirit  of  grace ; — or  by  fome  degree  of  grace  peculiar  to 
their  carnal  birth,  which  they  would  fall  from  if  they  were  to 
live  to  adult  years ;  but  this  laft  particular  not  only  involves 
falling  from  grace,  but  is  a  contradiction  to  ver.  7,  from  which 
it  is  clear,  that  "that  which  is  born  of  the  flefh,"  is  flefh  only. 
But  if  thefe  pafTages  do  really  relate  to  man  in  his  infancy, 
as  well  as  other  ftages  of  life  ;  then  if,  as  Mr.  E.  would  have 
it,  our  Lord  fpake  of  thofe  children  as  belonging  to  the  king- 
dom of  heaven_  without  reference  to  their  being  born  again, 
the  contradiction  and  falfhood  are  exceeding  palpable.    The 
truth  is,  when  our  Lord  fays,  "  of  fuch  is  the  kingdom  of  hea- 
ven,"  he  does  not  refer  to  children  in  nature  only  ;  for  that 
would  prove  too  much,  viz.  that  the  kingdom  of  heaven  was 
altogether  made  up  of  little  children  ;  but  he  refers  to  both 
children  and  adults  who  are  born  again,  for  adults  in  their  new 
birth  become  as  little  children.     But  it  will  not  follow  becaufe 
our  Lord  bleffed  and  made  fome  children  members  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,  that  this  is  the  cafe  with  all  children  ;  nor  with 


[  41  ] 

ftll  the  children  of  believers,  any  more  than  it  will  follow  that 
becaufe  fome  adults  are  made  fo,  therefore  all  are ;  and  were  it 
fo  we  rauft  certainly  admit  of  falling  from  grace. 

But  after  all  it  may  be  afked,  how  can  infants,  or  little  chil- 
dren, according  to  the  Baptift  plan,  be  born  again  and  favcd, 
fince  faith  is  neceflary  to  falvation,  and  Mr.  E.  fays  that  the 
Baptifts  affirm  that  infants  cannot  have  faith  ?  I  anfwer,  Mr. 
E.  has  mifreprefented  the  Baptifts  upon  this  point  as  well  as 
others.  When  they  fay,  that  infants  cannot  have  faith,  their 
meaning  is,  as  they  have  explained  themfelves  an  hundred  times, 
that  they  cannot  have  it  in  form,  as  adults  do.  They  cannot 
have  it  vifibly  and  manifestly,  unlefs  they  have  Chrift  to  fpeak 
for  them  now,  as  he  did  for  thofe  mentioned  in  the  text  under 
confideration.  Faith  in  its  nature  or  quality  confifts  of  the 
graces  of  the  fpirit.  Faith  in  form  is  actual  believing  ;  and  in- 
fants may  have  the  firft,  without  the  latter,  as  eafiiy  as  they' 
can  pofTefs  the  qualities  of  adults  without  being  capable  of 
their  bodily  and  mental  exercifes,  and  therefore  may  be  faved 
without  formal  faith.  But  in  human  view  they  are  never  to  be 
coniidered  as  belonging  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  or  as  fub- 
jects  of  baptifm,  till  their  faith  by  fome  means  becomes  mani- 
feft  :  all  prior  to  this,  is  only  hope  in  the  mercy  of  God  with- 
out  any  manifestation  of  it  in  them  ;  and  it  is  immaterial  whe- 
ther the  kingdom  of  God,  or  of  heaven,  be  explained  cf  the 
gofpel  church  in  this  world,  or  of  the  kingdom  of  glory  ;  for 
they  who  have  a  right  to  the  one,  have  a  right  alfo  to  the  other. 
Again,  Mr.  E.  is  under  the  fame  difficulty  with  regard  to  the 
apoftles,  as  he  is  with  regard  to  their  mafter ;  for  he  has  fo  ex- 
plained Peter  as  to  make  him  contradict  Paul,  and  thus  to  in- 
volve one  of  them  in  a  falfhood.  Paul  declares,  Rom.  ix.  8, 
that  "  the  children  of  the  flefh,  are  not  the  children  of  God  ; 
but  the  children  of  the  promife  are  counted  for  the  feed."  1 
have  noted  before,  that  the  children  of  God  and  the  children 
of  the  promife  are  the  fame.    This  cannot  be  denied.    It  will 

D2 


I  42  ] 

follow  then  from  the  whole,  that  the  children  of  God  are  not 
only  the  children  of  the  promife,  but  the  only  children  of  the 
promife  ;  for  on  the  other  hand  it  is  exprefs,  that  the  children 
of  the  fleih  are  not  the  children  of  God,  and  therefore  cannot 
be  the  children  or  heirs  of  the  promife.  But  according  to  Mr. 
E.  Peter,  Acts  ii,  39,  applies  the  promife  to  the  children  of  the 
fieih ;  which  if  true,  the  contradiction  and  error  between  the 
two  apoflles  are  at  once  evident. 

Mr.  E.  is  here  again  in  a  pinching  dilemma ;  for  he  no  foon- 
er  grants,  that  thefe  children  were  of  the  number  of  the  called 
and  penitent  fpoken  of  and  addreiled  in  the  text,  than  he  ruins 
his  whole  arv.iur.eiit,  and  gives  up  the  point  to  us  ;  and  if  they 
were  not  of  that  number — were  not  born  again,  and  had  at 
leaft  the  habits  of  faith,  it  is  utterly  beyond  his  reafoning  pow- 
ers, mighty  as  they  are,  to  prove  that  they  were  the  children 
of  God,  and  fo  of  the  promife. 

I  havefaid  enough  already  to  cut  him  off  from  all  his  reafon- 
ing from  this  paiTage ;  but  I  will  juft  notice  one  thing  more. 
He  runs  the  line  of  the  promife  from  the  text  thus  :  "  To  you 
aduli.3  and  to  your  infants,  who  are  prefent ;  to  you  adults  who 
are  afar  off,  and  to  your  infants  ;  to  as  many  adults  as  the  Lord 
our  God  iliall  call,  and  their  infants."  This  ftatement  is  all 
fophiitry,  and  like  the  reft  of  his  reafoning  from  the  text,  di- 
rectly contrary  to  the  apoftle's  meaning.  According  to  the 
text,  the  promife  runs  through  the  medium  of  the  divine  call- 
ing to  individuals  of  the  different  ages  and  circumftances  men- 
tioned, thus  :  To  ycu  adults  who  are  called,  or  as  many  of  you 
as  the  Lord  our  God  fhall  call ;  and  to  your  children,  even  as 
many  as  the  Lord  onr  God  iliall  call ;  and  to  all  that  are  afar 
off,  adults  and  children,  even  as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God 
fhall  call. 

I  fhall  now  leave  him  upon  this  point,  pleafed  however  to  fee 
him  tug  and  labour  at  Mr.  B.'s  argument,  in  which  he  refem- 
Lles  a  man  attacking  the  fturdy  oaks  with  reeds  and  ftraws. 


[  43  ] 

But  to  ihow  the  reader  further  how  effectually  my  argument 
cuts  hirri  off,  not  only  from  the  aforementioned,  but  from  eve- 
ry paffage  from  the  beginning  ef  Matthew  to  the  end  of  Reve- 
lations, and  alfo  from  all  the  gofpel  prophecies  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, I  would  obferve,  that  if  Sarah  in  her  declaration  againft 
the  bond-woman  and  her  fon,  faying,  "  Cart  them  out ;  for  the 
fon  of  the  bond-woman  fhall  not  be  heir  with  my  fen,''  repre- 
fented  the  new  covenant  or-  Teftament,  it  muft  neceffarily  be  the 
uniform  language  of  the  whole  Tefcament;  and  therefore  for 
Mr.  E.  to  pretend  to  bring  one  finale  gofpel  text  from  the  whole 
Bible  in  fupport  of  the  heirship  of  the  fen  of  the  bond-woman, 
or  any  of  the  natural  feed  represented  by  him,  is  at  beft  noth- 
ing fhort  of  mifapplication  and  perveriion  $  and  as  the  Lord 
approved  of  Sarah's  declaration,  every  fuch  pretence  is  turning 
the  word  of  God  againft  himfelf*  and  inadvertently  charging 
the  Almighty  with  inconfiftency  and  error. 

The  reader,  perhaps,  by  this  time,  will  begin  to  think  that 
I  have  more  than  half  violated  my  promife  in  the  beginning,  that 
I  mould  not  attempt  to  anfwer  Mr.  E.'s  arguments  in  form ; 
and,  indeed,  I  had  not  then  concluded  to  purfue  them  in  this 
manner,  (nor  is  this  in  proper  form;)  much  lefs  had  I  deter- 
mined to  follow  his  example  in  giving  a  fceme  of  the  contro- 
verfy:  but  I  now  think  it  will  be  of  great  ufe  in  applying  the 
general  argument,  fince  it  will  afford  a  more  concife  and  eafy 
view  of  the  ground  which  both  parties  occupy. 

SCHEME,  fcfr. 

Mr.  E.  begins  by  referring  to  a  number  of  pafTages  of  fcrip- 
ture  which  he  fays  are  common  to  both  fides,  viz.  Baptifts  and 
Paedo  Baptifts.  Matth.  iii.  6:  "And  were  baptized  of  him  in 
Jordan,  conferring  their  fins."  Mark  xvi.  16:  "He  that  believ- 
eth,  and  is  baptized,  fhall  be  faved."  Ads  ii.  4 1 :  "  Then  they 
that  gladly  received  his  word,  were  baptized."  Ads  viii.  27 : 
And  Philip  faid,  If  thou  believeft  with  all  thine  heart,  thou 


[  44  ] 

mayeft."  And  then  he  adds — "  N.  B.  Thefe  places,  and  oth- 
ers of  the  fame  kind,  as  they  prove  the  baptifm  of  an  adult  to 
be  right,  are  expreffive  of  the  fentimcnt  of  Baptifts  and  Paedo 
Baptifts  with  refpect  to  an  adult  fubject ;  for  both  think  it  right 
to  baptize  an  adult:  And  as  they  prove  equally  on  both  fides, 
they  cannot  be  urged  by  either  party  againft  the  other."  But 
this  ftatement  is  a  medley  of  contradiction — true  of  both,  and 
falfe  of  both;  and  fully  proves  Mr.  E.'s  great  ignorance  of  the 
true  grounds  of  the  difference  between  the  Baptifts  and  Paecfo 
Baptifts;  and  hence  it  is  evident  that  he  only  folloAved  the  Bap- 
tifts traditionally  for  a  while,  and  at  laft  fell  off,  like  the  ftony 
ground  hearers,  becaufe  he  was  not  truly  one  of  them. 

Suppofe  here  were  two  adults  who  had  juft  been  brought  to 
believe  in  Chrift :  the  Baptifts  would  fay,  they  ought  both  to  be 
baptized.  Mr.  E.  we  will  fay,  puts  the  queftion,  Were  you  not 
baptized  in  your  infancy  ?  One  of  them  anfwers,  no.  Mr.  E. 
would  then  agree  with  the  Baptifts  that  he  fhould  be  baptized. 
The  other  anfwers,  yes.  Would  Mr.  E.  then  agree  with  the 
Baptifts  that  he  alfo  ought  to  be  baptized?  Surely  not. 

One  principal  object  of  his  fcheme  is  to  mow,  that  the  Bap- 
tifts have  not  an  exclufive  right  to  the  paflages  of  fcripture  he 
has  mentioned ;  and  I  admit,  that,  with  regard  to  the  firft  cafe 
ftated  in  the  fuppofition,  they  have  not;  for  here  Mr.  E.  agrees 
with  them  in  the  truth.  But  they  would  have  juft  as  good  a 
right  to  urge  them  for  the  baptifm  of  the  adult  in  the  fecond 
cafe,  as  he  or  they  would  in  regard  to  the  firft ;  for  by  thefe 
very  fcriptures  the  foundation  of  infant  baptifm  is  rendered  null 
and  void.  According  to  him,  the  church  was  the  fame  in  ef- 
fence  before  the  coming  of  Chrift,  as  it  is  under  the  gofpel;  and 
baptifm  now  anfwers  the  purpofe  that  circumcilion  then  did : 
but  it  is  certain,  that  a  multitude  of  the  people,  faid  in  thofe 
paflages  to  have  been  baptized,  or  to  have  been  candidates  for 
baptifm,  were  fuch  as  had  been  received  into  the  church  by  cir- 
cumcifion  in  their  infancy;  and  therefore  if  the  truth  authorif- 


[         45         ] 

ed  thebaptifm  of  fuch,  when  they  believed  at  adult  years,  thefe 
fcriptures  equally  authorife  the  Baptifts  now  to  baptize  thofe 
adults,  when  they  believe,  who  were  baptized,  as  the  Psedo 
Baptifts  term  it,  in  their  infancy.  And  thus  the  queftion  is  juft 
as  much  whether  adults  are  to  be  baptized,  as  infants;  and  it 
is  alfo  clear  that  thefe  fcriptures  do  not  equally  prove  on  both 
fides,  but  may  be  urged  againft  infant  baptifm  with  as  much 
force  as  though  the  firft  cafe  were  out  of  the  queftion  entirely. 
I  will  now  prefent  the  fcheme  by  comparing  the  arguments 
on  both  fides. 

Arguments  for  Infant  Baptism.  Arguments  against  Infant  Baptism. 

1.  God  has  constituted  in  his 
church  the  membership  of  in- 
fants, and  admitted  them  to  it  by 
a  religious  rite. 

2.  The  church  membership  of         The  church  membership  of  in- 
infants  was  never  set  aside,  by     fants  has  been  set  aside,  both  by 
God  or  man;  and  consequently     God  and  man;  and  therefore  is 
continues  in  force  to  the  presexjtt     of  no  force  at  the  present  day. 
day.  Coroll.  As  God  hath  dissolved 

i  the  church  membership  of   in- 

fants, they  should  not  be  receiv- 
ed to  membership,  because  God 
hath  dissolved  it. 

Dilemma.  Since  infants  must  not 
be  received  to  membership;  they 
must  not  be  baptized. 

The  above  ftatement  prefents  a  fcheme  of  the  controverfy 
only  as  between  Mr.  E.  and  myfelf :  I  will,  therefore,  give  the 
reader  a  general  one,  under  a  fimilar  form. 

Arguments  for  Infant  Baptism.  Arguments  against  Infant  Baptism. 

1.  There  was  in  reality  but  one         1.  There  were  really  two  cov- 

covenant:*  the  covenant  of  cir-     enants  made  with  Abraham;  or 

*  /  knoiv  the  Pado  Baptists  believe  also  in  a  covenant  of  redemption,  made 
iviih  Christ,  which  they  distinguish  from  the  covenant  of  grace ;  hut  in  my 
opinion  -without  any  foundation. 


[ 


46 


1 


cumcision  made  with  Abraham 
was  the  covenant  of  grace. 


2.  This  covenant  Was  the  foun- 
dation of  the  visible  church ;  and 
Abraham's  seed  constituted  mem- 
bers of  it,  and  circumcision  the 
rite  of  initiation. 


3.  The  visible  church,  under 
the  gospel,  changed  her  rituals; 
but  still,  standing  upon  the  same 
covenant,  remained  in  nature  and 
essence  the  same. 


4.  The  change  of  rituals  ren- 
dered it  necessary  that  some  new 
rite  should  be  substituted  in  the 
rOom  of  circumcision:  baptism  has 
therefore  taken  h«  place. 


5.  The  manner  in  which  Abra- 
ham's children  were  constituted 
members  of  the  church,  being 
such  as  rendered  it  necessary  that 
they  should  be  circumcised— the 


at  least  Abraham  had  a  standing 
in  two  covenants;  the  first  in  re- 
spect to  visibility,  the  covenant 
of  circumcision — the  second  the 
covenant  of  grace;  and  was  the 
father  of  two  seeds,  as  represent- 
ed by  a  two-fold  allegory  in  his 
house. 

2;  The  covenant  of  circumci- 
sion respected  the  coming  of 
Christ  of  his  seed  according  t0 
the  flesh;  and  hence  it  was  put 
into  the  flesh — -included  the  chil- 
dren of  the  flesh— and  may  be 
Called  the  covenant  of  the  flesh. 

3;  The  covenant  of  grace  res- 
pected the  coming  of  Christ  in 
the  spirit ;  and  hence  was  put  in- 
to the  heart,  or  spirit— included 
the  children  of  the  spirit — and 
may  be  called  the  covenant  of 
the  spirit. 

4.  The  covenant  of  the  flesh, 
with  the  children  of  the  flesh,  and 
its  rites  and  ceremonies,  suited 
to  a  nation  or  church  in  the  flesh, 
stood  as  the  visible  church  till 
Christ  appeared  in  the  flesh;  and 
then,  its  end  and  design  being 
answered,  he  abolished  it  in  his 
flesh.  Its  whole  body,  members, 
rites,  ceremonies,  &c.  as  relating 
to  the  flesh,  were  cast  out,  as  in 
the  allegory. 

5.  The  covenant  of  the  spirit 
having  existed  with  a  part  of  the 
spiritual  seed  during  the  first  dis- 
pensation, yet  invisible  as  to  its 
church  form,  now  comes  in  with 


c 


47 


J 


same  right  belonging  to  the  chil- 
dren of  believers  now,  renders  it 
necessary  that  they  should  be  bap^ 
tized- 


Cont/usion. 
Infants  miibt,  therefore,  neces- 
•arily  be  the  subjects  of  baptism, 
and  of  course  should  be  baptized. 


Christ  and  thespiritual  seed  which 
were  yet  alive  from  among  the 
Jews,  and  adds  to  them  the  be- 
lieving Gentiles,  having  received 
from  Christ  its  visible  institutions 
of  baptism  and  the  Lord's  supper, 
together  with  its  whole  code  of 
laws,  and  stands  as  the  visible 
church  under  the  gospel. 
Conclusion. 
The  church,  under  both  dis-. 
pensations  is  not  the  same.  Bap- 
tism does  not  come  in  the  room 
of  circumcision:  it  pertains  to  the 
spiritual  church.  It  is  not  the 
having  the  flesh  of  Abraham,  or 
of  believers,  but  their  faith,  which 
gives  a  title  to  the  visible  institu-> '. 
tions  of  the  spiritual  church,  and 
the  promise  in  that  line.  Infants, 
in  their  natural  birth,  can  have 
only  the  first  3  and  we  cannot  know 
that  they  have  the  latter  at  all  till 
themselves  can  manifest  it. 
Therefore,  infants  are  necessa 
rily  excluded  from  baptism* 

N.  B.  The  view  intended  to  be  conveyed  by  this  form,  may 
be  as  well,  and  perhaps  better  received  by  reading  the  partic* 
ulars  in  courfe,  than  in  contraft. 

Here,  candid  reader,  if  I  have  not  miftook,  is  the  general 
fcheme  of  that  important  controverfy  which  has  produced  fo 
much  difputing  and  fo  many  thoufands  of  books  in  the  world  j 
and  which  has  continued  in  a  greater  or  lefs  degree  from  the 
time  when  Hager  and  Sarah  firft  began  it,  down  to  the  prefent 
day:  attend  clofely,  take  the  Bible,  examine  every  argument^ 
and  judge  for  yourfelves* 


[  48  ] 

What  I  have  faid  before  with  regard  to  adult  baptifm,  cuts 
off  all  Mr.  E.'s  reafoning  in  the  firft  four  pages  of  his  fcheme; 
but  he  finds  it  ncceffary  to  eftablifh  himfelf  more  effectually _a- 
gainft  the  idea  of  an  effential  change  ^^^"Jj! 
church.  The  greater  part  of  the  Psdo  Baptifts  are  fenfible,  that 
?  "be  once  given  up  that  the  '--venant  in  diuina.onfrom 
the  covenant  of  grace,  was  the  foundation  of  the  vmble  church 

has  taken  place;  and  if  fo,  that  every  argument  n  favour  of 
tafa,  baptifm  is  for  ever  loft.  Therefore,  in  order  to  avoid 
h  !  difficW  they  plead  that  the  law  was  not  in  exiftence  for 
a  long  time  after  the  church  was  conftituted  in  his  houfe  nd 
to  prove  it,  they  quote  the  apoftle,  Gal.  in.  : £T e  hw 
which  was  four  hundred  and  thirty  years  after;  that  is,  atte, 
the  conftrrnation  of  the  covenant  in  Chnft,  on  which  they  fay 

neaio'n  wfth  this,  to  refute  what  Mr.  B.  has  faid  upon  th. 
pogrom  Heb.vii.  H,   « For  the  priefthood  being  changed 
there  is  made  of  neceff.ty  a  change  alfo  of  the  law.       But « is 
needlefe  for  me  to  take  particular  notice  of  it ,  ftnee  admitting 
ft   o  be  juft,  which  is  by  no  means  the  cafe,  it  would  only  ferve 
to  ffio  v th  t  Mr.  B.'s  rlafoning  from  that  particular  text,  was 
no, Sufficient  to  anfwer  his  pnrpofe ;  and  ft  is  more  efpecially 
fo, in  that  I  have  clearly  proved  the  point  already  by  a .umber 
of  other  paffagesof  fcripture.    I  will  however  obferve,  no  wfth- 
ftandins  all  Mr.  E.  has  faid  to  the  contrary,  that  the  rule  la.d 
Ln  in  the  text,  viz.  that  the  change  in  the  law  was  the  con 
feouence  of  change  in  the  priefthood,  is  the  fame  by  which  all 
Slaw    of  Judfifm  were  dUfolved.    Thus  the  covenant  on 
which  the  church  was  founded,  being  diffolved,  or  asthe  fcnp- 
Sys,  caftout,  the  church  itfelf  is  diffolved  or  caft  ou.; 
and  the  church  being  caft  out,  all  her  laws,  rites,  ceremonies, 
&c.  w  re  caft  out  as  being  of  no  farther  ufe  iu  the*  lateral  aP- 


[  49  ] 

plication;  and  hence  the  main  reafon  why  circumcifion  was 
not  admitted  into  the  gofpel  church  was,  became  the  fiibjectd 
of  it,  as  fuch,  were  not  admitted  there,  but  were  fent  out  like 
Hagar  and  Ilhmael  into  the  wiklernefs.  The  children  cf  the 
flefli  to  whom  circumcifion  was  applied  as  fuch,  not  being 
counted  for  the  feed,  or  in  other  words,  confidered  as  nothing 
with  regard  to  the  promife  ;  circumcifion  itfelf  of  courfe  be- 
comes nothing. 

The  next  argument  requires  more  particular  attention,  inaf- 
much  as  there  feems  to  be  fome  fcriptural  foundation  for  it. 
The  defign  of  it  is  to  mow,  that  Mr.  B.'s  argument  for  a  change 
in  the  church,  taken  from  a  change  in  the  priefthood  and  the 
law,  could  not  be  carried  farther  back  than  to  Mount  Sinai, 
where  the  law  was  given,  and  the  priefthood  inftituted  ;  and  fo 
could  not  in  reality  affect  the  church  which  was  conftituted  in 
Abraham's  houfe  feveral  hundred  years  before,  and  therefore 
that  Mr.  B.  has  committed  an  egregious  miftake  in  chronology 
in  applying  of  it  beyond  that  period. 

But  the  pafiage  commonly  quoted  in  proof  of  this,  as  before 
mentioned,  befides  its  not  agreeing  with  the  date  of  the  church, 
only  refers  to  the  law  in  the  propagation  of  its  fulnefs,  which 
had  exifted  before  in  a  more  fimple  form.  At  any  rate,  neither 
Mr.  E.  nor  any  of  his  Psedo  Baptift  brethren  can  find  any  thing 
in  it  to  their  advantage,  fince  the  apoftle  himfeif  has  determin- 
ed that  his  meaning  was  not  according  to  their  expofition  of  it, 
by  declaring,  that  the  law  exifted  in  Abraham's  houfe,  and  waa 
the  foundation  of  the  vifible  church  there*  His  language  could 
hardly  be  more  exprefs.  "  Tell  me  ye  that  defire  to  be  under 
the  law,  do  ye  not  hear  the  law  ?"  and  then  immediately  pro- 
ceeds to  inform  them  from  the  fcripture  what  the  law  was. 
il  For  it  is  written  that  Abraham  had  two  fons,  the  one  by  a 
bond-maid"  &c.  It  is  certain  then  that  the  apoftle  found  the 
law  in  Hagar,  and  Hagar  in  Abraham's  houfe;  and  to  put  it  be^ 
yond  all  difpute  that  this  law  was  the  fame  in  fubftance,  which 

E 


I  50  j 

was  given  at  Mount  Sinai  in  its  fulnefs,  he  runs  the  line  clown 
From  Hagar  directly  to  the  point,  and  fays,  that  this  "  Agar  is 
Mount  Sinai  in  Arabia."  And  then  again,  that  it  mould  not 
be  difputed  whether  the  law  given  at  Sinai  was  the  foundation 
of  the  Jewiih  church  till  Chrifc  came,  he  runs  the  line  down 
from  Sinai  to  Jerufalem,  and  fays,  that  Sinai  "  anfwereth  to  Je- 
rufalem which  now  is  ;"  or  which  was  fo  called  to  diftinguifh 
it  as  the  literal  Jerufalem.  Thus,  Agar,  Sinai,  and  Jerufalem 
are  fet  in  rank,  to  fhow  that  the  law,  or  Sinai  covenant,  was 
the  foundation  of  the  vifible  church  from  Abraham's  time  till 
the  coming  of  Chrift  ;  and  to  filence  every  queftion  with  regard 
to  circumftances,  the  ftate  of  Jerufalem  and  her  children  is  il- 
luftrated  by  that  of  Hagar  and  her  fon.  And  finally  to  de^ 
momtrate  in  the  cleareft  manner,  that  the  Jewiih  and  Chriftian 
church  were  not  eflentially  the  fame,  the  apoftle  not  only  men* 
tions  the  two  women  with  their  children,  the  two  covenants  and 
the  two  Jerufalems ;  but  fays  exprefsly,  that  the  firft  was  in 
bondage  with  her  children,  while  the  other  with  her  children 
was  free. 

Mr.  E.  from  the  two  arguments  againft  Mr.  B.  upon  this 
point,  has  drawn  out  a  number  of  remarks  and  obfervations 
fufficient  to  fill  up  rive  or  fix  pages  more,  and  characterized  Mr, 
B.'s  argument  as  extremely  weak,  abfurd  and  miferable  ;  and 
in  fome  inftances  has  allowed  his  imagination  to  play  itfelf  off 
in  a  kind  of  triumphant  ftrain,  as  though  he  thought  himfelf 
juft  about  to  grafp  the  laurels  of  victory,  if  they  were  not  aU 
ready  in  his  pofieffion ;  but  every  one  knows,  that  the  flighty 
ftrokes  and  obfervations  of  any  difputant  which  arife  from  the 
fuppofed  weight  of  his  own  reafoning,  are  of  but-  little  confe- 
quence.  The  reader  will  form  his  idea  of  an  argument,  fimilar 
to  that  of  a  tree,  with  its  branches,  ftock,  and  root ;  and  if, 
when  a  reply  is  made,  he  finds  the  root  cut  off,  he  will  know 
it  rauft  die,  though  it  be  not  trimmed  out  and  ftript  of  all  its 
branches. 


f         51         ] 

Again,  notwithstanding  the  Baptifts  contend  againft  the  idea 
of  the  continuation  of  the  fame  church,  and  that  baptifm  has 
come  in  the  room  of  circumcifion ;  yet  they  do  not  object  to 
the  famenefs  of  things  in  a  variety  of  particulars  under  both  dii- 
penfations,  when  rightly  underftood  and  applied.  Thus  for  in- 
ftance,  the  fpiritual  promife  under  the  law,  and  the  fpiritual 
promife  under  the  gofpel,  are  one  and  the  fame.  The  faith  of 
the  faints  under  the  law,  and  the  faith  of  the  faints  under  the 
gofpel ;  or  the  fpiritual  feed  under  the  law,  and  the  fpiritual 
feed  under  the  gofpel  are  efientially  the  fame.  The  feed  of  the 
flefh  under  the  law,  and  the  flefhly  feed  of  believers  under  the 
gofpel  in  refpedt  to  their  moral  ftate,  are  efientially  the  fame. 
The  cafting  out  of  Hagar  and  her  fon,  cr  of  the  carnal  feed 
from  Abraham's  family,  and  the  reje&icn  of  the  carnal  feed  un- 
der the  gGfpel  are  in  their  fenfe  and  meaning  eflfentially  the  fame. 

And  for  the  fake  of  parallel  I  will  alfo  admit,  that  baptifm  in 
a  certain  fenfe,  has  come  in  the  room  of  circumcifion  ;  and  in- 
deed with  regard  to  the  difference  between  the  churches,  and 
the  fhifting  of  the  difpenfations,  it  may  be  allowed  in  general, 
that  the  new  covenant,  or  the  gofpel,  has  come  in  the  room  of 
the  old  covenant,  or  law.  That  Chrift,  as  a  prieft,  has  come 
in  the  room  of  the  Jewifh  priefts.  That  the  Chriftian  church 
has  come  in  the  room  of  the  Jewifh  church.  That  the  fpiritual 
feed  has  come  in  the  room  of  the  carnal  feed.  That  baptifm 
has  come  in  the  room  of  circumcifion,' or  in  fome  refpects  may 
anfwer  to  the  fpiritual  feed,  as  circumcifion  did  to  the  carnal 
feed. 

Now  the  great  miftake  of  the  Paedo  Baptifts  lies  here.  They 
feem  to  fuppofe  that  the  covenant  of  grace  was  in  the  fame 
fenfe  the  foundation  of  the  Jewifh,  as  of  the  gofpel  church  ; 
and  fince  it  is  clear  from  fcripture  that  the  covenant  of  circum- 
cifion was  the  foundation  of  the  Jewifh  church,  they  confider 
the  covenant  of  grace  and  the  covenant  of  circumcifion  as  the 
fame.     Hence  they  unite  the  gofpel  church  and  the  Jewifh 


L 


church  as  one.  and  conclude  that  the  only  difference  made  in 
the  church  under  the  two  difpenfations  conlifts  in  the  number 
and  forms  of  its  ordinances  and  inftitutions,  while  its  members 
and  fubjects  remain  the  fame  ;  and  thus  the  two  feeds  are  con- 
founded in  the  vifible  church  order  under  the  gofpel,  as  before. 
They  do  not  feem  to  confidcr,  that  the  believers  in  the  Jewifh. 
church  were  rot  members  of  that  church  by  virtue  of  their 
faith,  but  by  virtue  of  their  natural  defcent,  or  circumcifion, 
and  thus  ftood  in  the  line  of  Hagar  and  Ifhmael,  while  in  re- 
gard to  their  faith  they  were  related  to  another  covenant,  and 
ftood  in  the  line  of  Sarah  and  Ifaac  ;  and  this  perhaps  for  want 
of  attention  to  Abraham  in  his  two-fold  character,  as  a  father 
in  the  fiefh,  and  a  father  in  faith  according  to  the  promife. 

I  wilh  not  to  weary  the  reader  with  repeated  ftatements  of 
the  fame  thing  ;  butthofe  who  can  fee,  mould  make  allowance 
for  thofe  who  cannot.  I  have  converfed  with  a  number  of 
honeft  fouls  who  are  fo  miferably  perplexed  with  the  tradition- 
al opinions  and  practices  of  their  forefathers,  -that  it  requires 
the  truth  with  regard  to  thefe  points  to  be  put  in  every  fhape, 
and  turned  every  way  which  it  can  be  confiftently,  in  order  to 
enlighten  them.  I  will  therefore  give  another  ftatement  of  the 
difference  between  the  two  covenants,  feeds,  churches,  &c.  by 
contrafting  a  few  of  the  characteriftical  figures,  terms,  and  ex- 
preiTions  which  are  applied  to  each  in  the  facred  oracles. 

Promise.  Premise. 

ToAbraharn;that  Christ  should  To  Abraham,  that  he  should 
come  of  his  seed  according  to  the  be  the  heir  of  the  world  through 
flesh.  the  righteousness  of  faith. 

'qnjfjarqp  tn  .iatpvy  u — Abraham — a  father  in  faith. 


Line  of  Descent. 
H.igar  and  Ishmat;!  ia  bondage. 
Old  covenant. 
First  covenant. 

Faulty  covenant  with  its  promise 
ace  irdi.'.'g'y. 


Line  rf  Descent. 
Sarah  and  Isaac  frtr. 

Neiv  covenant. 
Second  covenant. 

Better  covenant  established  upon 
''.  /.  r  pronv'ses. 


I 


53 


3 


Gospel. 

Mount  Zloii. 

Jerusalem  which  is  above. 

Christian  church. 

Christ's  priesthood. 

Sacrifice  of  Christ. 

Blood  of  Christ. 

Spirit. 

Seed  of  the  spirit. 

Regeneration,   or  circumcision  of 
the  heart 

Baptism  as  a  visible  profession. 

Sons. 

Grace. 

Sum  of  the  whole :  True,  or  more 
pcrfecl  tabernacle  with  its  ap- 
purtenances, righteousness, peace, 
and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost.  Wor~ 
shipping  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in 
truth. 
{k  It  was  — —  necessary  that  the  But  the  heavenly  things  thetv-clves^ 
patterns  of  things  in  the  heavens         iviih  better 


Law. 

Mount  Sinai. 

Jerusalem  which  noiv  is. 

Jewish  congregation  or  nation. 

Jewish  priesthood. 

Sacrifices  of  beasts. 

Blood  of  bulls  and  goats. 

Flesh. 

Seed  of  \}\c  flesh. 

Circumcision  of  the  flesh. 

Circumcision  as  a  visible  token. 

Servants. 

Works. 

Sum  of  the  whole  : 

Worldly  sanctuary  with  its  ap- 
purtenances, meats,  drinks,  divers 
•zvashi.-igs,  carnal  ordinances,  &C 


should  be  purified  with 

These; 


taketh  away  the 
First, 


Sacrifices." 
And  now, 
"He 

that  he  may  establish  the 
Heb.ix.  24,  Second." 

and  x.  9. 


The  whole  volume  of  inspiration  is  divided  by  this  line,  and 
ir:  the  Jewifli  church,  though  not  in  its  vifible  order,  the  dif- 
ference is  made  exceeding  plain.  "  O  Jerufalem,  Jerufalem, 
thou  that  kiliedft  the  prophets  and  ftoneft  them  that  are  fent 
unto  thee  !"  &c.  The  carnal  feed,  or  perfecuting  part  of  the 
Jewifh  church,  are  fet  in  rank  with  all  the  perfecutors  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world  down  to  the  time  of  our  Saviour,  and 
contrafted  with  the  true  feed  thus :  "  That  the  blood  of  all  the 

E2 


E  54  ] 

prophets,  which  was  fhed  from  the  foundation  of  the  world, 
may  be  required  of  this  generation:  From  the  blood  of  Abel 
unto  the  blood  of  Zacharias,  which  periftied  between  the  altar 
and  the  temple  :  verily  I  fay  unto  you,  it  (hall  be  required  of 
this  generation  ;"  that  is,  of  this  generation  of  pcrfecutors. 

The  divifion  in  every  part  of  the  fcriptures  is  evident.  Seme 
fpeak  of  the  Jewifh  church  only.  Others  of  the  gofpel  church 
only.  Others  are  compound,  or  fpeak  of  both  churches,  and 
carry  type  and  antitype  together.  But  as  I  have  hinted  before, 
ur.  E.  and  indeed  thePaedo  Baptiftsin  general,  make  miferable 
work  in  explaining  and  applying  many  of  thefe.  By  explain- 
ing thofe  which  relate  to  the  Jewifh  church  of  the  Chriftian 
church,  this  carnal  generation,  thefe  children  of  the  flefh  are 
brought  in  as  heirs  with  the  fpiritual  feed  ;  the  glory  of  the 
gofpel  church  and  the  great  doctrines  of  grace  are  kept  continu- 
ally clouded  with  the  (hades  of  Judaifrn.  And  when  they  ex- 
plain thofe  which  relate  to  the  gofpel  church  of  the  Jewifh 
churci*  the  confequeuces  are  nearly  the  fame.  But  abftractly 
from  this  controverfy,  the  doctrines  of  grace  and  the  way  of 
falvation  by  Jefus  Chrift  are  ib  explained  by  many  of  them,  as 
to  rip  up  the  whole  foundation  of  infant  baptifm  at  once;  and 
I  Lave  not  uflfrequently  heard  and  ie^n  from  both  the  pul- 
pit and  the  pvefs. 

Nbr  are  the  Baptifts  in  many  inftances  much  more  confid- 
ent. 'They  frequently  apply  paflages  which  pertain  to  the 
Jewiih  church  to  the  Chriftian  church,  in  fuch  a  manner  as  juf- 
tifies  the  very  principles  on  which  infant  baptifm  is  founded, 
and  thus  to  undermine  themfelves.  Even  Dr.  Gill,  all  Baptift 
and  divine  as  he  was,  has  in  fome  inftances  explained  the  Jew- 
ifh national  righteoufnefs,  fo  frequently  mentioned  by  the  pro- 
phet Ezekiel,  of  the  righteoufnefs  of  faith ;  and  indeed  a  clear 
and  full  diftinclion  between  law  and  grace,  is  in  many  refpects 
fo  race  and  difficult  a  point,  that  I  know  not  whether  the  great- 
eft  and  boft  of  men  of  either  party  can  pofiibly  avoid  fome  in- 


C         BS         J 

confiflency  here".  Upon  this  point  it  is  that  the  Calvinifts  and 
Arminians  divide.  The  Arminians  take  the  line  of  the  law, 
and  explain  the  gofpel  to  it,  while  the  Calvinifts  take  the  line 
of  grace ;  it  is  however  a  fact,  that  infant  baptifm,  ftrictly 
fpeaking,  is  not  confident  with  any  fcheme  of  divinity  but  the 
Arminian  ;  and  on  the  other  hand,  the  Baptift  fyftem,  whether 
they  manage  it  more  confidently  or  not,  is  in  itfelf  of  all  others 
the  moft  confiftent  gofpel  plan. 

To  convince  the  reader  of  the  truth  of  thefe  remarks,  I  would 
put  him  upon  the  query,  why  it  was  that  the  natural  feed  as 
fuch,  being  taken  into  the  Jewifh  church  by  circumciiion  in 
their  infancy,  always  had  a  zeal  for  God,  but  not  according  to 
knowledge  ?  They  went  about  to  eftablifh  their  own  righteouf- 
nefs  to  the  exclufion  of  the  righteoufhefs  of  faith  ;  while  the 
fpiritual  feed  trufted  in  the  righteoufnefs  of  faith  only.  In  a 
word,  no  underftanding  Baptift  will  ever  be  convinced  of  the 
propriety  of  infant  baptifm,  till  it  be  fully  proved,  that  the 
apoftle,  when  he  faid  there  were  two  covenants,  actually  meant 
there  was  but  one. — That  when  he  fpake  of  Sarah  and  Ifaac, 
he  really  meant  Hagar  and  Ifhrnael,  or  at  leaft  meant  to  include 
them. — That  when  he  ufed  the  term  grace,  he  meant  the  law, 
or  meant  to  include  it. — That  when  he  faid,  the  children  of  the 
flefh  were  not  the  children  of  God,  he  meant  that  they  were  the 
children  of  God. — And  on  the  whole,  that  when  he  faid,  "  Caft 
out  this  bond-woman  and  her  fon ;  for  the  fon  of  the  bond- 
woman fhall  not  be  heir  with  the  fon  of  the  free  woman,"  he 
meant  to  be  underftood,  Keep  in  this  bond-woman  and  her 
fon  ;  for  the  fon  of  the  bond-woman  fhall  be  heir  with  the  fon 
of  the  free  woman. 

I  could  now  produce  a  number  of  articles  from  Poedo  Bap- 
tift authors  in  proof  of  what  I  have  laid  down,  particularly 
Burkitt,  Brown,  M'Ewen,  &c.  For  though  they  have  all  ex- 
plained the  allegory  in  the  fourth  chap,  to  the  Gala,  very  cau- 
tioitfly;  yet  the  apoftle  has  fo  worded  himfelf,  that  they  cannot 


£         56         ) 

expound  him  at  all  without  involving  the  very  ideas  which  the 
3aptifts  infift  upon  ;  I  /hall  however  pafs  this  over  for  the  pre* 
fent. 

But  as  Mr.  E.  has  taken  considerable  pains  toabufeand  mil* 
reprefent  Mr.  B.  with  regard  to  his  quoting  authors,  and  on 
purpcfe  I  conclude  to  raife  a  prejudice  againft  his  books  ;  and 
the  books  in  our  country  being  fcarce,  1  will  extract  a  part  of 
tome  of  the  quotations,  that  people  may  fee  what  concefiions 
a  number  of  the  moft  learned  and  eminent  Pcedo  Baptifts  in  the 
world  have  made  to  us  in  refpect  to  this  controverfy. 

Mr.  Fuller  :  "  We  do  freely  confefs,  that  there  is  neither 
exprefs  precept,  nor  precedent,  in  the  New  Teftament,  for  the 
baptizing  of  infants." — There  were  many  things  "  which  Je- 
fus  did,  which  are  not  written ;  among  which,  for  aught 
appears  to  the  contrary,  the  baptizing  of  thefe  infants  (Luke 
xviii.  15, 16,  17.)  might  be  one  of  them."  In  *Psedo  Baptifm 
exam*  vol.  2,  p.  3. 

Luther  :  "  It  cannot  be  proved  by  the  facred  fcripture  that 
infant  baptifm  was  inftituted  by  Chrift,  or  begun  by  the  fiift 
Chrifiians  after  the  apoftles,"  p.  4» 

Mr.  Ob ed  Wills  :  "  Chrift  did  many  things  that  were  not 
recorded,  and  fo  did  the  apoftles  ;  whereof  this  was  one,  for 
aught  we  know,  the  baptizing  of  infants." — Ibid. 

Vitringa  :  "  It  is  not  related  as  a  fact,  in  the  grofpels  and 
acts  of  the  primitive  church,  that  infants  were  baptized  by 
Chriit,  or  by  the  apoftles." — P.  5. 

Mr.  Samuel  Palmer  :  "  There  is  nothing  in  the  words  of 
the  inftitution,  nor  in  any  after  accounts  of  the  adminiftration 
of  this  rite,  refpedting  the  baptifm  of  infants :  there  is  not  a  lin- 

*  Mr.  Booth's  two  first  volumes  on  baptism  are  entided,  "  Pxdo 
Baptism  examined,  on  the  principles,  concessions,  and  reasonings  of 
the  most  learned  Predo  Baptists  ;"  and  he  has  particularly  referred 
to  the  books,  parts,  chapters,  sections  and  pages  from  which  his  nu- 
merous quotations  were  taken. 


[        M        ] 

gle  precept  for,  or  example  of,  this  practice  through  the  whole 
New  Teftament. — Ibid. 

Magdeburg  Centuriators  :  "  Concerning  the  baptifm 
of  infants,  there  are  indeed  no  examples  of  which'  we  read." — 

P.  6. 

Erasmus:  "  Paul  does  not  feem  (in  Rom.  v.  14.)  to  treat  a- 
bout  infants.  It  was  net  yet  the  cuftom  for  infants  to  be  bap- 
tized."—Ibid. 

Mr.  T.  Boston  :  "  There  is  no  example  of  baptifm  record- 
ed in  the  fcriptures,  where  any  were  baptized  but  fuch  as  ap- 
peared to  have  a  laving  intereft  in  Chrifr. — P.  7. 

Bp.  Pride  aux:  "  Paedo  Baptifm,  and  the  change  of  the  Jew- 
ifh  Sabbath  into  the  Lord's  day,  reft  on  no  other  divine  right 
than  epifcopacy." — P.  7. 

Mr.  Walker  :  "  Where  authority  from  the  fcripture  fails, 
there  the  cuftom  of  the  church  is  to  be  held  as  law. — It  doth 
not  follow,  that  our  Saviour  gave  no  precept  for  the  baptizing 
of  infants,  becaufe  no  fuch  precept  is  particularly  exprefled  in 
the  fcripture  ;  for  our  Saviour  fpake  many  things  to  his  difciples- 
concerning  the  kingdom  of  God,  both  before  his  paffion  and  alfo 
after  his  refurreclion,  which  are  not  written  in  the  fcriptures ; 
and  who  can  fay,  but  that  among  thofe  many  unwritten  fayings 
of  his,  there  might  be  an  exprefs  precept  for  infant  baptifm  r" — 
P.  8. 

Anonymous  :  "As  to  the  feed  of  the  church,  the  children  of 
Chriftians,  at  what  age,  under  what  circumftances,  in  what 
mode,  or  whether  they  were  baptized  at  all,  are  particulars 
the  New  Teftament  does  not  exprefsly  mention." — Ibid. 

CEcolampadius  :  "  No  pafiage  in  the  holy  fcripture  has 
occurred  to  our  obfervation  as  yet,  which  as  far  as  the  flender- 
aefs  of  our  capacity  can  difcern,  mould  perfuade  us  to  profefs 
Paedo  Baptifm. — P.  9. 

To  quotations  of  the  like  import,  eighteen  more  venerable 
names  ftand  annexed,  fuch  as  Bp.  Burnet,  Dr.  Wall,  Mr. 


[  58         ] 

Marshall,  M.  Baxter,  Stapferus,  Limborch,  M.  De 
la  Roque,  Mr.  Leigh,  Dr.  Freeman,  Mr.  Cawdrey,  Dr. 
Field,  Bp.  Sandderson,  Bp.  Stillingfleet,  Dr.  Tov.r- 
irson,  Heideggerus,  Witsius,   Cellarius,   Staphi- 

LUS,    &C. 

Now  the  nioft  of  thcfe  writers  exprefsly  acknowledge,  and 
all  of  them  implicitly,  that  there  is  no  exprefs  command,  pre- 
cedent, or  example  in  the  New  Teftament  for  the  baptizing  of 
infants  ;  and  fome  of  the  extracts  I  have  made,  fully  infinuate, 
that  infant  baptifm  was  unknown  to  the  apoftles.  Let  us  hear 
fome  of  them  with  others  of  their  party  upon  that  point. 

Ludouicus  Vives  :  "  No  one  in  former  times  was  admit- 
ted to  the  facred  baptiftry,  except  he  was  of  age ;  underftood 
what  the  myftical  water  meant ;  defired  to  be  waihed  in  it;  and 
expreffed  thatdefire  more  than  once." — In  p.  76. 

M.  Forme y:  "  They  baptized  from  this  time,  (the  latter 
end  of  the  fecond  century)  infants  as  well  as  adults." — Ibid. 

Curcell;eu  s  :  "  The  baptifm  of  infants,  in  the  two  firft  cen- 
turies after  Chrift,  was  altogether  unknown  ;  but  in  the  third 
and  fourth,  was  allowed  by  fome  few.  In  the  fifth  and  follow- 
ing ages  it  was  generally  received — The  cufcom  of  baptizing  in- 
fants did  not  begin  before  the  third  age  after  Chrift  was  born. 
In  the  former  ages  no  trace  of  it  appears — and  it  was  introduc- 
ed without  the  command  of  Chrift." — P.  76,  77. 

M.  De  la  Roque  :  "  The  primitive  church  did  not  bap- 
tize infants ;  and  the  learned  Grotius  proves  it  in  his  Annota- 
tions on  the  Gofpel." — P.  77. 

Johannes  Bohemus:  "Baptifm  of  old  wasadminifteredto 
none  (unlefs  upon  urgent  neceffity)  but  to  fuch  as  were  before 
inftru&ed  in  the  faith  and  catechifed.  But  when  it  came  to  be 
judged  necefiary  to  everlafting  life,  it  was  ordained  that  infants 
mould  be  baptized,  and  that  they  mould  have  god-fathers  and 
god-mothers,  who  fhould  be  fureties  for  infants,  and  mould 
renounce  the  devil  in  their  behalf." — P.  77,  78. 


[  59  ] 

To  the  fame  purpofe  are  Salmasius,  Suicerus,  Mr. 
Chambers,  Rigaltius,  Dr.  Holland,  Cattenburgh, 

WOLFGANGUS  CAP1TO,  VENEMA,  &C. 

Some  of  thefe  authors  alfo  give  us  the  firft  grounds  of  infant 
baptifm  thus. — 

Salmasius  :  "  An  opinion  prevailed,  that  no  one  could  be 
faved  without  being  baptized  ;  and  for  that  reafou  the  cuftom 
arofe  of  baptizing  infants." — In  p.  128. 

Venema  :  "  The  ancients  connected  a  regenerating  power, 
and  a  communication  of  the  fpirit,  with  baptifm." — P.  136. 

Suicerus  :  "We  cannot  deny,  that  many  of  the  ancients 
maintained  the  abfolute  neceffity  of  baptifm.  Chrysostom 
fays,  It  is  impoffble,  without  baptifm,  to  obtain  the  kingdom  ; 
and  foon  after,  7/  is  impoffible  to  be  faved  without  it. — This 
opinion  concerning  the  abfolute  neceffity  of  baptifm,  arofe  from 
a  wrong  underitanding  of  our  Lord's  words  :  Except  a  man  be 
born  of  water  and  the  fpirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven. — Chrysostom  again  fays,  If  an  infant  die  without 
baptifm,  through  the  negligence  of  'the prfbyter,  woe  to  that  pref 
byter  I  but  if  through  the  negligence  of  the  parents,  woe  to  the 
parents  of  that  infant  /" — P.  129. 

Episcopius  :  "  Psedo  Baptifm  was  not  accounted  a  necef- 
fary  rite,  till  it  was  determined  fo  to  be  in  the  Milevitan  coun- 
cil, held  in  the  year  four  hundred  and  eighteen." — Ibid. 

Dr,  Owen  :  "  Moil  of  the  ancients  concluded  that  it  (bap- 
tifm) was  no  lefs  neceifary  unto  falyation  than  faith  or  repen* 
tance  itfelf," — Ibid, 

To  thefe  might  be  added,  Vitringa,  Hospinianus,  Dr. 
Wall,  &c.  and  irid:  ed  the  Dr.  in  his  elaborate  hiftory  of  infant 
baptifm,  has  founded  the  practice  altogether  upon  the  neceffity 
of  it  to  larval*  ;  i.  The  following  is  the  fubftance  of  his  whole 
argument :  To  be  bom  of  water  and  of  the  fpirit — To  have 
the  warning  of  regeneration  and  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghoft ; 
js  to  be  baptized.    All  the  ancients  understood  it  in  this  light, 


[  60  ] 

and  therefore,  when  they  ufed  the  expreffions — regeneration— 
born  again,  &c.  they  meant  baptifm  ;  and  iince  regeneration  or 
the  new  birth,  is  as  necefTary  to  the  falvation  of  infants  as  adultsj 
both  were,  and  ought  to  be  baptized. 

But  Mr.  B.  in  his  reflections  upon  the  foregoing  quotations* 
has  alio  introduced  the  following. 

Confejjton  of  Helvetia :  '  To  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  Chriftj 
'  is  to  be  enrolled,  entered,  and  received  into  the  covenant  and 

*  family,  and  fo  into  the  inheritance  of  the  fons  of  God  :  Yea, 

*  and  in  this  life  to  be  called  after  the  name  of  God ;  that  is  to 

*  fay,  to  be  called  the  fons  of  God,  to  be  purged  alfo  from  the 

*  filthinefs  of  fins,  and  to  be  endued  with  the  manifold  grace  of 
'  God,  for  to  lead  a  new  and  innocent  life/ — In  p.  1 36. 

Confejjton  of  Bohemia  :  '  We  believe  that  whatfoever  by  bap- 
'  tifm — is  in  the  outward  ceremony  fignified  and  witnefied,  all 

*  that  doth  the  Lord  God  perform  inwardly.     That  is,  that  he 

*  wafheth  away  fin,  begetteth  a  man  again,  and  beftoweth  fal- 
'  vaiton  upon  him — For  the  beftowing  of  thefe  excellent  fruits 
'  was  holy  baptifm  given  and  granted  to  the  church/-"~P.  136, 
137* 

Confejjton  of  Augfburg  :  '  Concerning  baptifm  they  teach, 
i  that  it  is  neceflary  to  falvation,  as  a  ceremony  ordained  by 

*  Chrift  :  alfo  that  by  baptifm  the  grace  of  God  is  offered.' — s 
P.  137. 

Confejjton  of  Saxony  :  '  /  baptize  thee  ;  that  is,  I  do  witnefs 

*  that  by  this  dipping  thy  fins  be  warned  away,  and  that  thou 

*  art  now  received  of  the  true  God/ — Ibid. 

Confejfton  of  Wittenburg :    '  We  believe  and  Confefs,  that 

*  baptifm  is  that  fea,  into  the  bottom  whereof,  as  the  prophet 
'  faith,  God  doth  cajl  all  our  fins.1 — Ibid. 

Confejjton  of  Suetrland :   *  As  touching  baptifm  we  confefs,- 

*  that  it  is  the  font  of  regeneration,  wafheth  away  fins,  and  fav- 
'  eth  us.  But  all  thefe  things  we  do  fo  underltand,  as  St.  Pe=* 
'  ter  doth  interpret  them/     l  Pet,  iii,  21,— Ibid.- 


L  61  ] 

Church  of  England:  'Baptifm,  wherein  I  was  made  a  mem* 

*  ber  of  Chrift,  the  child  of  God,  and  an  inheritor  of  the  king* 
c  dom  of  heaven— How  many  facraments  hath  Chrift  ordained 
'  in  his  church  ?  Two  only,  as  generally  necefiary  to  falvation  ; 

*  that  is  to  fay,  baptifm  and  the  fupper  of  the  Lord.' — Ibid. 

Wejlminjler  AJJembly  ;  '  Before  baptifm,  the  mmifter  is  to  life 
'  fome  words  of  inftruclion,  mowing,  that  it  is  inilituied  by  our 
'  Lord  Jefus  Chrift ;  that  it  is  a  feal  of  the  covenant  of  grace, 

*  of  our  ingrafting  into  Chrift,  and  of  our  union  with  him,  of 

*  remiffion  of  fins,  regeneration,  adoption,  and  life  eternal/ — lb. 

Luther  affirms,  that  'There  is  in  the  baptifm  of  infants, 

*  the  beginning  of  faith  and  of  a  divine  operation,  in  a  manner 
'  peculiar  to  themfelves/ — P.  138. 

Gerhardus  :  '  The  facrament  of  baptifm  does  not  profit 

*  without  faith  :  neverthelefs  it  is  the  efficacious  mean  by  which 
'  God  of  his  grace  works  faith,  regeneration,  and  falvation  in 

*  the  hearts  of  infants/ — Ibid. 

Buddeus  :    *  All  men  mould  be  baptized,  who  are  to  be 

*  brought  to  eternal  falvation — Now  feeing  infants  cannot  be 

*  brought  to  faith  by  the  preaching  of  God's  word ;  itfollowSj 
'  that  it  muft  be  effected  in  another  way,  namely,  by  baptifm, 
'  by  which  men  are  born  agairu'-^IbitU 

Deylingius:  *  Baptifm  is  the  facrament  of  initiation,  and 

*  as  it  were,  the  gate  of  heaven. '—Pi  139. 

Mr.  Isaac  Ambros  :  '  By  baptifm  we  are  warned,  we  are 

*  fanctified,  we  are  justified,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jefus,  and 

*  by  the  fpirit  of  our  God.' — Ibid. 

Mr.  John  Wesley  :  '  If  infants  are  guilty  of  original  fin, 

*  in  the  ordinary  way,  they  cannot  be  faved,  unlefs  this  be 
'  warned  away  by  baptifm/ — P.  143. 

To  the  fame  purpofe  alfo  are  Dr.  Fiddes,  Mr.  Gee,  Dr* 
Waterland,  Dr.  Whitby,  Bp.  Wilson,  Dr.  Featly,  and 
others:  Yea,  even  the  judicious  Mr.  Henry  fays  that '  baptifm 
wrefts  the  keys  of  the  heart  out  of  the  hands  of  the  ftrong  man 

F 


C  62  ] 

armed,  that  the  pofTtfiion  may  be  furrenclered  to  him  vrhofe 
right  it  is.'  Now  what  is  the  more  remarkable  of  thefe  authors 
is,  that  they  were  of  different  denominations. 

N.  B.  I  have  not  taken  thefe  laft  extracts,  viz.  from  the 
confeiTions,  &c,  from  Mr.  Booth  in  form,  as  they  were  not  in- 
ferted  in  his  book  in  paragraphs. 

Mr.  B.  has  likewife  collected  a  number  of  conceffions  from 
fome  of  thefe  authors,  and  others  who  were  Paedo  Baptifts, 
that  neither  the  Jewifn  profelyte  baptifm — nor  Jewifh  circum- 
cifion and  the  law — nor  any  of  the  palTages  in  the  New  Tefta- 
ment,  commonly  urged  in  proof  of  infant  baptifm,  afford  a  fuf- 
ticient  foundation  for  the  practice.  So,  that  upon  the  whole, 
they  could  not  practife  it  becaufe  of  any  fcripture  command, 
precept  or  example  for  it ;  for  the  moft  of  them  acknowledge 
that  there  are  none.  And  if  any  of  them  practifed  it  upon  the 
ftrength  of  analogy  and  inference,  others  have  deflroyed  their 
premifes  and  all  their  pretended  relation  between  circumcifion 
and  baptifm.  And  if  they  practifed  it  becaufe  it  is  not  forbid- 
den, Mr.  B.  has  mown  from  themfelves,  that  that  is  the  weak- 
eft  kind  of  prefumptioH,  and  the  foundation  of  all  the  vagaries 
of  Popery, 

The  truth  of  the  cafe  is,  that  the  neceflity  of  baptifm  to  fal- 
ration  has  been  from  firft  to  laft  the  grand  reafon  of  its  being 
applied  to  infants  ;  and  though  fome  of  thefe  authors,  and  mul- 
titudes of  the  Psedo  Baptifts  in  common,  deny  the  idea,  and 
contend  warmly  againft  it ;  yet,  I  think  I  mall  be  ahle  to  mow 
in  lefs  than  a  fingle  page,  that  their  fcheme  as  neceffarily  in- 
volves it,  as  the  idea  of  human  exiftence  involves  that  of  a  living 
foul.  For,  1.  Take  for  granted  what  the  fcripture  fays,  that 
we  are  faved  by  grace,  that  is,  by  grace  alone.  2.  Take  for 
granted  what  they  fay,  that  the  covenant  of  circumcifion  is  the 
covenant  of  grace,  then  out  of  that  covenant  there  can  be  no 
falvation.  3.  Take  for  granted  what  the  fcripture  fays,  that 
no  perfon  could  enjoy  the  bleflings  of  that  covenant  without 


r     03     ] 

being  circumcifed.  "  The  uncircumcifed  man-child,  whole  flefh 
of  his  forefkin  is  notcifcumcifed,  that  foul  mail  be  cut  off"  from 
3ils  people :  he  hath  broken  my  covenant :"  Confequentiy  could 
not  be  faved.  4.  Take  for  granted  what  they  fay,  that  bap* 
tifm  has  fucceeded  circumcifion  under  the  gofpel  as  a  feai  to 
the  fame  covenant,  and  to  anfwer  the  fame  purpofes,  and  that 
it  is  now  to  be  adminiftered  on  the  face :  And  then,  5.  Shall 
we  not  be  obliged  to  grant,  that  the  fame  confequences  which 
followed  the  neglect  of  circumcifion  will  alfo  follow  the  neglect 
of  baptifm  ;  viz.  that  the  unbaptized  man-child,  whofe  flefh  of 
his  face  hath  not  been  baptized,  that  foul  mall  be  cut  off  from 
his  people  :  he  hath  broken  the  Lord's  covenant  of  grace,  and 
therefore  cannot  be  faved.  Nor  will  it  anfwer  any  purpofe  for 
them  to  advert  to  the  plea  for  a  diftinction  between  the  exter- 
nal and  internal  parts  of  the  covenant,  for  upon  this  very  prin- 
ciple it  is  that  the  apoftle  has  aflerted  and  eflablifhed  the  plu- 
rality of  the  covenants  ;  and  befides,  admitting  the  idea,  if  the 
external  part,  which  comprehended  the  children  of  the  flefh, 
hath  been  caft  out  and  rejected  by  the  gofpel,  what  has  become 
of  the  foundation  of  infant  baptifm  even  upon  that  plan  ? 

The  reader  will  now  realize  the  inconliftency  of  building  in- 
fant baptifm  upon  the  covenant  of  circumcifion  as  the  covenant 
of  grace,  and  yet  denying  the  neceffity  of  baptifm  to  falvation  ; 
and  therefore,  that  they  only  who  acknowledge  the  fact,  are 
confident  with  themfelves.  He  may  alfo  fee,  as  has  been  hint- 
ed before,  how  perfectly  fuch  Psedo  Baptifts  harmonize  with 
the  Judaizing  teachers  of  old  ;  for  only  transfer  the  meaning  of 
circumcifion  to  baptifm,  as  they  do,  and  they  both  appear  ex- 
actly in  the  fame  light,  "  Except  ye  be  circumcifed  (bottized) 
ye  cannot  be  faved." — See  Acts  xv.  l. 
.  I  have  now  a  few  things  to  fay  upon  the 
Mode  of  Baptism. 

All  that  Mr.  E.  has  faid  upon  the  mode  of  baptifm  feems  de- 
signed to  make  out,  if  poffible,  that  there  is  nothing  in  the 


[  64  ] 

meaning  of  the  word,  nor  in  any  thing  which  the  fcripture  has 
laid  about  the  ordinance,  that  confines  us  to  immerfion  in  the 
adminifbration  of  it.  After  a  number  of  remarks  and  criticifms 
which  it  is  needlefs  for  me  to  take  notice  of  here,  he  arrives  at 
his  ne  plus  ultra — that  the  word  baptize  properly  fignifies  to 
warn  in  fome  way  or  other,  and  that  nothing  more  nor  lefs  can 
be  made  of  it.  The  following  are  fome  of  his  very  remarkable 
words  upon  that  point,  p.  87  :  "  And  though  there  has  been 
much  difpute  about  the  word  "baptize,"  fome  affirming  it  to 
mean  immerfion  only,  others  afperfion  and  affufion,  as  well  as 
immerfion ;  yet,  properly  fpeaking,  it  means  neither  of  them. 
It  has  indeed  been  ufed  for  all  the  modes  of  warning — fprink- 
ling,  pouring  and  immerfing  ;  whereas  it  does  not  exprefs  the 
cne  nor  the  ether,  but  warning  only  ;  and  may  be  done  in  ei- 
ther of  the  modes  :  And,  therefore  when  we  read  of  any  per- 
fon  or  thing  being  baptized,  we  cannot  conclude  from  the  word 
itfelf  whether  it  was  done  by  affufion,  afperfion  or  immerfion." 
A  little  after  this  he  appears  very  condefcending,  and  feem- 
ingly  abates  the  force  of  an  argument  to  give  the  Baptifts  fome 
room  to  breathe ;  generoufly  allowing,  that  there  is  at  leaft 
fome  prefumptive  evidence  in  favour  of  immerfion  from  the 
circumftance  of  baptifm's  being  performed  in  rivers,  &c.  But 
I  will  be  as  generous  and  condefcending  as  he.  For  argument 
Bike  I  will  admit  that  the  only  fignification  of  the  word  bap- 
tize is  to  wafh  ;  nay,  I  will  condefcend  further ;  I  will,  for  a 
while  at  leaft,  fubftitute  the  word  warned  in  the  place  of  bap- 
tized, and,  if  occafion  requires,  put  warning  for  baptifm.  He 
feems,  however,  after  all  his  profeffed  willingnefs  to  favour  us, 
to  feel  difpofed  to  retrench  a  little  upon  our  prefumptive  evi- 
dence, as  he  calls  it;  for  he  fays,  p.  88,  "  It  cannot  be  proved 
with  certainty  that  thofe  who  were  baptized  at  or  in  Jordan, 
Enon,  &c.  were — I  will  not  fay  totally  immerfed,  but  that  they 
were  fo  much  as  in  the  water  at  all.  Whoever  is  acquainted 
with  the  indeterminate  fenfe  of  the  prepofitions,  en>  eis,  ek  and 


L  65  ] 

apo,  on  which  this  proof  muft  depend,  will  be  very  fenfible  of 
this.  Thefe  occur  in  the  following  fcriptures  :  Math.  hi.  6. 
They  were  baptized  of  him  en  to  Jordanee,  in  Jordan — en  rneana 
not  only  "in,"  but  "nigh,  near,  at,  by,"  &c,  Acts  vii.  S3. 
"  They  went  down  both,  eis  to  udcr,  into  the  water  ;"  but  eis 
befides  "into,"  often  means  "  towards,  near,"  &c.  In  a  note 
he  fays,  "  John  xx.  4,  5,  came  firft  to  (eis)  the  fepulchre — yet 
went  he  not  in.  From  which  it  is  evident  that  eis  fignifies  to 
as  well  as  into :  and  therefore  to  pretend  to  determine  the 
mode  of  baptifm  from  the  fignification  of  that  word  is  trifling." 
Very  well,  ail  this  I  will  admit  alfo,  that  is  for  argument  fake* 
without  referve.  Now  let  us  try  the  whole  and  fee  where  the 
plain  dictates  of  reafon  and  common  fenfe  will  lead  us.  And 
were  waihed  of  him,  nigh  Jordan — were  warned,  near  Jordan — 
Were  warned,  at  Jordan — were  waihed,  by,  that  is  the  fide  of 
Jordan — were  warned,  in  Jordan.  Which  is  the  raoft  proper 
to  fay,  that  perlbns  or  things — were  wafhed,  nigh  the  water — 
or  were  warned,  near  the  water — or  were  waihed,  at  the  water 
— or  were  wafhed,  by  the  water— or  were  warned,  in  the 
water ;  or  that  they  were  waihed,  nigh  water — or  were  warn- 
ed, near  water — or  were  wafhed,  at  water — or  were  warned, 
by  water — or  were  warned,  in  water?  I  prefume,  that  no  can- 
did unprejudiced  perfon  will  hefltate  a  moment  to  acknowledge 
that  common  fenfe  is  in  favour  of  the  latter,  as  conveying  the 
moft  natural,  rational,  and  confiftent  idea. 

It  is  faid  again,  that  "  John  was  baptizing,  (warning)  in  E« 
lion,  near  to  Salim,  becaufe  there  was  much  water  there." 
This  paiTage  furnifhes  us  with  two  particulars.  1.  An  hiftori- 
cal  alfertion,  "John  was  baptizing  in  Enon  near  to  Salim."  2. 
It  gives  the  caufe  or  reafon  of  his  choofing  Enon  for  that  pur- 
pofe,  "  Becaufe  there  was  much  water  there."  John  then 
went  to  Enon  to  warn,  becaufe  there  was  much  water.  But 
probably,  according  to  Mr.  E.  John  went  there  for  the  fake  of 
warning,  nigh  much  water — or,  near  much  water — or,  ^vmuch 

V2 


water — or,  by  much  water,  inftead  of  waffling,  in  much  Water, 
or  having  a  Sufficient  and  convenient  quantity  of  water  for  waffl- 
ing. I  rcuft  confefs  that  this  founds  to  me  quite  unnatural. 
What  adminiftrator  of  warning,  would  be  (o  fimple  as  to  felecl 
a  place  out  of  a  whole  country  with  a  direct  view  to  there  be*- 
ing  much  water  in  it,  and  repair  to  it,  merely  for  the  fake  of 
wafhing  nigh,  near,  at,  or  by  much  water,  when  the  quantity 
would  make  no  difference  with  him  in  regard  to  warning  itfelf  ? 
The  reafons  which  Mr.  E.  has  given  for  this  are  but  poor  piti- 
ful fhifts,  for  if  a  gill  cup  full  of  water,  which  is  four  times  fb 
much  as  is  generally  ufed  by  Pasdo  Baptifts,  had  been  fufficient 
to  wafh  a  candidate,  a  good  well,  or  fpring,  or  little  rill  would 
have  iupplied  the  wafher  with  it,  and  quite  as  faft  as  he  could 
have  ufed  it ;  and  therefore  would  have  afforded  a  plenty, 
though  all  the  people  of  Judea  had  been  proper  candidates, 
and  applied  to  him  for  wafhing ;  and  a  fmall  rivulet  would 
have  been  quite  fumcient  both  for  wafhing  and  other  ufes;  for 
every  body  in  our  country  knows  what  a  fupply  fuch  a  ftream 
will  afford  to  the  cattle  and  people  of  a  populous  city,  when 
concluded  into  it. 

Again,  "  They  went  down  both  (els)  into  the  water,  both 
Philip  and  the  Eunuch  ;  and  he  baptized  (wajked)  him." 
But  "«/,"  fays  Mr.  E.  "  befides  into,  means  toward,  near,  to." 
Well,  pombly  then  they  acted  in  conformity  to  one  of  thefe 
fenfes ;  let  us  try  them,  and  fee  whether  they  be  as  natural  as 
the  other.  They  went  down  both,  towards  the  water,  and  he 
warned  him.  They  went  down  both,  near  the  water,  and  he 
wafhed  him.  They  went  down  both,  to  the  water,  and  he 
wafhed  him.  They  went  down  both,  into  the  water,  and  he 
wafhed  him.  They  are  faid  before  to  come  unto  a  certain  wa- 
ter ;  and  if  we  muft  underfiand  the  prepofition  here  of  their 
going  to  the  water,  it  will  make  it,  unto  the  water,  and  to  the 
water.  Now,  as  the  defign  of  the  prepofitior^is  to  exprefs  the 
Nation  between  baptizing  or  wafhing,  and  water,  and  in  fame 


[         67         ] 

inftances  a  great  river  of  water*  and  much  water  ;  that  fenjg  of 
them  which  beft  expreffes  this  relation,  is  certainly  the  moft 
congenial  with  reafon  and  common  fenfe,  and  that  it  is  that  of 
in  and  into-,  no  impartial  mind  can  doubt  for  a  moment ;  and 
therefore,  even  the  fuppofition  that  this  might  have  been  fup- 
plied  with  either  of  the  others  in  this  cafe,  is  fo  far  ftriking  at 
the  good  fenfe  and  rationality  of  the  Bible*  Betides,  Mark  fay s$ 
Jefus  Chrift  was  baptized  (eis,)  into  Jordan. — Chap.  i.  9, 
But  were  eis  in  this  pafTage  rendered  near,  the  idea  would  be 
quite  too  remote  to  make  good  fenfe  ;  and  were  it  rendered  to* 
or  towards,  it  would  make  nonfenfe  ;  for  then  it  would  read* 
baptized  to,  or  towards  Jordan.  Thus  the  reader  will  fee,  that 
granting  Mr.  E.  all  he  contends  for,  with  regard  to  the  mean- 
ing of  the  word  baptize,  and  the  prepofitions  en  and  eis  $  yet 
the  balance  of  evidence  is  in  our  favour,  in  proportion  as  fay* 
ing  baptized,  cr  warned  in,  or  into  water,  is  more  proper  than 
to  fay  baptized,  or  warned,  nigh,  near,  at,  by,  to,  or  towards 
water.  But  here  Mr.  E.'s  term  wafhed,  to  exprefs  the  fenfe  of 
the  word  baptized,  founds  flat  and  lean,  when  compared  with 
our  term  immer lion.  Thus  the  infpired  hiftorian,  baptized 
into  Jordan.  Thus  Mr.  E.  baptised,  washed  into  Jordan, 
And  thus  the  Baptifts,  baptized,  immersed  into  Jordan. 

I  will  here  fubjoin  an  extract  from  Mr.  B.  which  will  fet  this 
matter  in  a  clearer  light  ftill.  "  We  will  take,  for  inftance,  the 
words  of  Ananias  to  Saul,  Acts  xxii.  16,  which  muft  be  read 
thus  :  Arife  and  be  washed,  and  wash  away  thy  fins  :  and 
thofe  of  Paul,  Rom.  vi.  3,  and  Gala.  iii.  27,  Know  ye  not,  that 
fo  many  of  us  as  were  WASHED  into  Jefus  Chrift,  were  WASH- 
ED into  his  death  ?  As  many  of  us  as  have  been  Washed  into 
Chriji,  have  put  on  Chrift. — Is  it  pouring  P  Then  we  muft  read, 
Mark  i.  9,  and  Acts  ii.  38,  41,  thus  i  Jefus  came  from  Naza- 
reth of  Galilee,  and  was  POURED  of  John  (eis,)  into  Jordan — 
Repent  and  be  POURED  every  one  of  you — Then  they  that  gladly 
received  his  wordj  were  poured. — Js  it  fprinkling  ?  Then  we 


[  68  ] 

ir.uft  read  John  iii.  23,  Rom.  vi.  4,  Col.  ii.  12,  thus  :  John  aU 
jo  was  sprinkling  in  Enon  near  to  Salim,  because  there 
was  much  water  there:  and  i bey  came  and  were  sprink- 
led. Therefore  we  are  buried  with  him  by  SFRI N  KLI N  G  *"«- 
to  death — Buried  with  him  by  sprinkling. 

Thefe  few  examples  may  fufnce  to  (how,  what  an  aukward 
appearance  the  noble  fenfe  and  mafculine  diction  of  infpiration 
wear,  when  expr?fled  according  to  this  hypothefis.  Whereas, 
if  inftead  pf.*wajbmg9  pouring,  or  /prink ling,  you  employ  the 
word  'unmet/ion  ;  the  preceding  paffages  will  make  a  very  dif- 
ferent figure,  and  read  thus:  Ari/e  and  be  immersed,  and 
wa/b  away  tbyj&nd — Know)  ye  not,  that  /o  many  of  us  as  were 
immersed  into  Jefus  Chrijl,  were  immersed  into  his  death? 
As  many  of  us  as  have  been  immersed  into  Chryl,  have  put  ort 
Chrijl — jfefus  came  from  Nazareth  of  Galilee,  and  was  1  m  m  E  R  S- 
ED  of  John  it,  (or  into)  Jordan — Repent  and  be  immersed 
every  one  of  y:  t — Then  they  that  gladly  received  his  word,  were 
immersed — John  alfo  was  immersing  in  Enon  near  to  Sa- 
lim, becaa/e  there  was  much  water  there  :  and  they  came  and 
were  IMMERSED — There/ore  we  are  buried  with  him  by  im- 
mersion into  death — Buried  with  him  by  immersion.  Here 
we  have,  if  I  miftake  not,  both  dignity  of  fentiment  and  pro- 
priety of  language.  Hence  it  appears,  that  the  word  baptizo 
is  connected  with  fuch  particles  (en  and  eisj  as  forbid  our  con- 
cluding that  either  wafo,  pour,  or  /prinkle,  is  a  proper  fubfti- 
tute  for  it.  The  form  of  expreffion  adopted  by  evangeiifts  and 
apoftics  is,  always,  if  I  miftake  not,  baptizing  in  or  into  feme* 
thing.  Thus,  for  example,  en  or  eis,  in,  or  into  Jordan  j*  en, 
in  water,  in  the  Holy  Spirit  \\  eis,  into  the  name,  J  into  Mofes,$ 
into  Chrift,j|  into  his  death. 5  Eis,  in  the  cafe  of  baptifm,  can- 
not be  rendered  to  or  towards  ;  becaufe  it  would  be  abfurd  to 
fay,  that  John  baptized  to  or  towards  Jordan  ;  nor  in  regard 

*  Matt.  iii.  6.     Mark  i.  0.  f  Matt.  iii.  11.  \  Matt,  xxviii. 

ly.        §  1  Corinth,  x.  2.         |f  Gal,  iii.  27,        J  Rom.  vi.  3. 


[  69  ] 

to  this  affair  can  en  be  tranflated  with  or  by  ;  becaufe  it  would 
be  aukward  to  fay,  John  baptized  with  or  by  Jordan  ;  befides, 
eis,  which  is  ufed  of  the  fame  adminiftration,  cannot  be  fo  ren- 
dered. Baptifm,  therefore,  being  exprefled  as  performed  in,  or 
into  fomething,  muft  be  immerfion,  and  not  pouring  or  fprink- 
ling ;  for  perfons  cannot  be  fprinkled  or  poured  into  water, 
though  they  may  be  plunged  into  it. 

Let  us  now  apply  the  fame  terms  to  the  different  metaphori- 
cal baptifms  of  which  we  read  in  the  New  Teftament.  There 
we  have,  the  baptifm  of  fujferings,  of  the  fpirit  and  of  fire,  of 
the  cloud  and  the  fea.  According  to  our  brethren,  the  paffages 
to  which  I  refer  muft  be  read,  either  thus  :  I  have  A  washing 
to  be  WASHED  with,  and  how  am  IJlraitened  till  it  be  accom- 
plijhed! — Hejhall  wash  you  with  (rather  in — en)  the  Holy  Spi- 
rit and  infire-L—And  were  all  washed  unto  Mqfes  in  the  cloud 
"and  in  the  fea.%  Or  thus  :  I  have  a  pouring  to  be  poured 
with,  and  how  am  1 Jlraitened  till  it  be  acccmplijked  ! — Hejhall 
POUR  you  in  the  Holy  Spirit  and  in  fire — And  were  all  poured 
unto  Mqfes,  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  fea.  Or  thus  :  I  have  a 
sprinkling  to  be  sprinkled  with,  and  how  am  IJlraitened  till 
it  be  accomplijhed  ! — He/hall  sprinkle  you  in  the  Holy  Spirit 
and  in  fire — And  were  all  sprinkled  unto  Mqfes,  in  the  cloud 
and  in  the  fea. — According  to  us,  the  manner  of  reading  thefe 
paflfages  will  be  this:  I  have  an  immersion  to  be  immersed 
with,  and  how  am  IJlraitened  till  it  be  accomplijhed  ! — Hejhall 
immerse  you  in  the  Holy  Spirit  and  in  fire — And  were  all  im- 
mersed unto  Mofes  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  Jea. — In  regard  to 
Luke  xii.  50,  if  you  render  the  word  baptifm  by  the  term  warn- 
ing, you  not  onty  fink  the  vigorous  idea,  but  convey  a  fentiment 
foreign  to  the  text.  For  the  term  wajhing  plainly  fuggefts  the 
notion  of  cleanfing  ;  whereas  it  is  manifeft,  that  our  Lord  here 
fpeaks  of  himfelf  perfonally — of  himfelf,  not  as  to  be  skanjed 

*  Luke  xii.  50.     Mat.  iii.  11.     1  Cor.  x.  2. 


[         70         ] 
from  fin,  but  puni/ked  for  it ;  or,  as  the  apoftle  afierts,  made- 

A  CURSE   FOR  US. 

Mr.  E«  has  mentioned  a  number  of  baptizings  recorded  in 
the  gofpel,  which  he  fays,  "do  not  appear  to  have  taken  place 
at  or  in  any  river — as  that  of  Paul,  of  the  jailor,  of  Cornelius, 
of  thofe  of  Samaria,  and  of  the  three  thoufand."  But  all  that 
he  has  faid  of  thefe,  and  the  various  necefiary  preparations  for 
the  adminiftration  of  the  ordinance,  avails  him  nothing.  For 
thefe  accounts  were,  and  are  to  be  received  juft  as  a  limilar  one 
would  now  he  received  among  us.  If  it  were  reported,  that  a 
thoufand  people  had  been  baptized,  and  joined  a  Prefbyterian 
church  in  fome  diftant  part  of  the  country  ;  every  perfon  of 
common  information  would  receive  it  at  once,  that  they  were 
baptized  by  affufion  or  afperfion,  unlefs  a  knowledge  of  this 
truth  would  create  an  exception,  that  fome  who  are  otherwife 
Prefbyterians  are  fo  fenfible  that  immeriion  is  the  gofpel  mode 
that  nothing  fhort  of  it  will  fatisfy  them,  and  that  their  minif- 
ters  will  fornetimes  conform  to  it  for  fear  of  loling  profelytes. 
But  if  the  report  mould  ftate,  that  a  thoufand  people  had  been 
baptized,  and  joined  a  Baptift  church,  none  would  entertain  a 
doubt  but  that  every  one  of  them  had  been  immeried.  And  if 
there  were  no  other  denomination  of  Chriftians  in  the  world  but 
Baptift s,  as  was  the  cafe  when  thofe  baptizings  took  place,  and 
it  was  reported  that  a  thoufand,  or  three  thoufand  people  had 
been  baptized-  no  one  would  indulge  for  a  moment,  fuch  pue- 
rile and  whimlkal  preemptions  as  Mr.  E.  brings  up,  about  cir- 
cumftances,  preparations,  &c.  for  all  would  know  that  every 
convenience  necefiary  to  immerfe  them,  had  been  obtained 
fomewhere. 

The  apoftle  has  alfo  told  us,  that  believers  in  thofe  times  were 
buried  with  their  divine  mafter  by  baptifm.  Chrift  himfelf  has 
reprefented  the  fulnefs,  the  keennefs,  the  extent  of  his  fuffering, 
and  the  bitternefs  of  his  death  by  a  baptifm  which  David  pro- 
phetically defcribes  thus :  "  I  fink  in  deep  mire  where  there  is 


[         71         ] 

no  ftunding  ;  I  am  come  into  deep  waters,  where  the  floods 
overflow  me." — Pfal.  Ixix.  2.  The  apoftle  likewife  tells  us,  1 
Cor.  xv.  3,  4,  that  "  Chrift  died  and  was  buried,"  and  hence 
the  phrafe  in  -Rom.  vi.  4,  "  Buried  with  him  by  baptifm." 
Now  taking  the  3d  and  4th  verfes  together,  they  mow  us,  l. 
That  the  faints  are  "  baptized  into  Jems  Chrift."  2.  That  to 
be  baptized  into  Chrift,  is  to  be  "  baptized  into  ^is  death." 
S.  That  to  be  baptized  into  his  death,  is  to  be  "buried  with 
him  by  baptifm  ;"  and  therefore  baptifm  can  be  nothing  fhort 
of  the  burial  itfelf,  for  it  is  the  very  thing  which  accomplifhes 
it.  Again,  if  Jefus  Chrift  had  not  been  buried  into  death,  the 
idea  exprefled  in  the  4th  verfe,  of  being  buried  with  him  into 
death  would  be  abfurd.  But.  if  he  was  buried  into  death,  what 
figure  could  defcribe  it  which  does  not  completely  exprefs  the 
idea  of  a  burial  ?  If,  therefore,  baptifm  be  not  a  burial,  he 
gave  but  a  lame  defcription  of  his  fufterings  and  death,  when  he 
reprefented  them  by  it.  The  fame  difficulty,  or  a  worfe  one, 
will  attend  the  apoftle.  For,  for  him  to  infinuate  that  Chrift 
was  buried  into  death — and  fay  that  his  people  were  buried 
with  him  into  death — and  that  they  were  buried  with  him  by 
baptifm  into  death,  when  he  did  not  mean  that  baptifm  was  a 
burial,  was  making  a  fool  and  a  deceiver  of  himfelf ;  for  it  was 
juft  faying  that  they  were  buried  by  that  which  he  himfelf  did 
not  believe,  nor  intend  that  others  ihould  receive  as  any  burial 
at  all. 

But  Mr.  E.  labours  here  with  all  his  might,  to  eftabliiri  a 
diftinclion  between  baptifm  and  a  burial ;  for  hefeems  to  know 
if  that  be  not  done  his  cafe  is  gone  forever.  He  would  have 
them  confidered  under  the  notion  of  caufe  and  eltecl,  and  the 
amount  of  his  rcafoning  is  this  ;  that  being  buried  with  Chrift 
is  to  be  brought  into  his  burial,  or  into  an  union  with  him  in  his 
burial,  which  is  brought  about  by  baptifm  as  the  inftrumental 
caufe ;  and  thus  union,  as  it  relates  to  them,  is  fubftituted  ia 
the  place  of  burial;  and  yet  it  will  not  do  to  fay  that  they  are 


[  72  ] 

buried  with  him  by  an  union,  for  then  union  muft  be  confider* 
ed  as  the  inftrumental  caufe  of  the  burial.  Let  us  ply  this  rule 
of  reafoning  a  little  clofer.  When  he  fays,  that  perfons  or 
things  are  baptized  by  afperfion,  does  he  not  mean  that  afper* 
lion  is  baptifm  ?  but  howabfurd  the  idea;  for  afperfion  is  only 
the  inftrumental  caufe  and  baptifm  the  effect ;  and  thus  if  he 
intends  to  prove  by  this  rule,  that  baptifm  is  not  a  burial,  though 
the  effect  of  it  may  be  fomething  under  that  name,  I  intend  to 
prove  that  neither  pouring  nor  fprinkling  is  baptifm,  let  their 
effects  be  called  what  they  will.  But  if  a  perfon  or  thing  were 
laid  to  be  buried  by  a  covering  over ;  how  weak  and  limple 
would  it  be  to  argue,  that  a  covering  over  was  not  a  burial,  but 
only  the  inftrumental  caufe  of  it ;  when  every  body  knows  that 
to  be  buried,  is  to  be  covered  over,  and  to  be  covered  over  is 
to  be  buried.  And  thus  we  fay  of  baptifm,  that  to  be  buried 
in  water,  is  to  be  baptized ;  and  to  be  baptized,  is  to  be  buried 
or  immerfed  in  water. 

But  admitting  the  idea,  that  baptifm  is  the  inftrumental  caufe 
of  bringing  the  faints  into  the  burial  of  Chrift,  yet  muft  not  the 
caufe  be  adequate  to  the  effect.  It  is  what  they  cannot  realize 
but  in  their  minds  by  faith,  and  whatever  introduces  their  minds 
to  juft  and  proper  views  of  the  death  or  burial  of  Chrift,  leads 
them  into  it ;  and  ferves  to  affift  them  both  in  regard  to  the  ex- 
tent and  form  of  faith,  as  a  pattern  of  a  thing  which  we  cannot 
fo  fully  realize  in  any  other  way,  ferves  to  affift  our  minds  in 
forming  juft  and  adequate  ideas  of  it.  But  if  the  pattern  be  de- 
ficient or  lacking  in  any  one  particular,  fo  much  of  its  defign 
and  ufefulnefs  are  entirely  loft ;  and  if  it  exceed  what  is  necefia- 
ry,  or  we  undertake  to  add  to  it  of  our  own  fancy,  it  will  not 
only  lead  to  wrong  ideas  of  its  object,  but  ftand  as  a  precedent 
to  any  and  all  kinds  of  licentioufnefs. 

Mr.  E.  cannot  deny  that  theapoftle's  reafoning  fairly  implies 
that  Chrift  was  buried  into  death.  Say,  then,  that  baptifm  is 
the  inftrumental  caufe  of  bringing  us  into  his  death  or  burial 


t         7S         ] 

baptized  into  his  death ;  which  however  canrfot  be  dene  ik^r* 
ally.  But  how  then?  " Emblematically  "  as  he  fays,  as  a  lior* 
is  put  for  generofity?  Or  figuratively,  as  carrying  with  it  the 
fafhion,  fhape,  formal  reprefentation,  or  pattern  of  his  burial 
into  death  ?  Not  the  firft;  for  baptifm  here  does  not  direct  to 
the  moral,  nor  gracious  qualifications  of  Jefus  Chrifl ;  but  to 
the  natural  evils  Which  he  endured — his  fufFcring  and  death. 
Of  courfe,  in  the  fubject,  it  cannot  refer  to  a  moral  or  gracious 
union  with  Chrifl ;  but  to  the  fdlowfhip  of  his  fufferings  which 
the  faithful  are  called  into,  which  is  reprcfented  in  the  paflage 
before  us  by  being  baptized  into,  and  in  Phil.  iii.  10,  by  being 
made  conformable  to  his  death.  Therefore  it  mult  be  the  lat- 
ter. 

But  how  does  Mr.  E.'s  patterns  look  when  compared  with 
the  object  to  be  reprefented  ?  The  object  is  a  burial  into  death. 
The  patterns,  or  figures  are,  fprinkling,  or  pouring  a  little  wa- 
ter upon.  Compare  the  whole  with  the  fcripture  patterns  as 
fupported  by  the  Baptitts — Baptized — immersed — buried 
with  him  by  baptifm  into  death.  Mr.  E/s  patterns  would  di- 
rect a  fubject  to  think,  that  Jefus  Chrifl:  had  a  few  fufferings,  or 
a  little  death  fprinkled  or  poured  upon  him,  and  to  a  fellow- 
fhip  of  them  accordingly  ;  or  rather,  that  he  was  fprinkled  ce 
poured,  and  his  people  fprinkled  or  poured  with  him  by  bap- 
tifm into  death. 

What  he  has  faid  upon  the  ,1th  ver.  planted  together  in  the. 
likenefs  of  his  death,  is  all  of  a  piece  with  the  reft.  No  ftrefs 
can  be  laid  upon  the- word  planted  ;  for  it  is  not  there  ufed  fo 
much  to  exprefs  the  mode  of  baptifm,  as  the  vifible  fl ate  of  the 
faints  on  the  earth.  It  diftinguifhes  them  from  the  world,  and 
expreffes  the  idea  of  a  vifible  fellowfhip  and  order  among  them- 
felvcs  fimilar  to  that  of  plants  in  a  garden,  which  are  fo  fet  and 
accommodated  to  each-  other,  as  that  the  whole  may  grow  to 
advantage.  But  the  word  likenefs,  has  fomething  in  it  in  our 
favour  as  it  refpects  the  mode  of  baptifm.    In  order  to  a  like* 

G 


[  74  ] 

?.?i3,  there  muft  be,  1.  Two  objects.,  2,  A  (imilarity,  or  agree- 
ment between  thole  objects  which  create  the  hkenefs.  The 
firit  of  thefe  is  the  death  of  Chrift  ;  he  himfelf  calls  his  death  a 
baptifm  ;  he  was  baptized,  buried  into  death.  The  fecond  is 
the  baptifm  of  believers  in  water — They  are  buried  with  him 
by  baptifm  into  death ;  and  thus  there  is  a  perfect  Hkenefs  be- 
tween the  death  of  Chrift  and  their  baptifm. 

Again,  Mr.  E.'s  remarks  upon  what  Mr.  B.  has  faid  of  the 
baptifm  cf  the  apoftles  witn  the  Holy  Ghoft  on  the  day  of  penti- 
coft,  and  the  electrical  bath,  are  in  fome  refpects  weak  and 
frivolous  ;  and  in  others,  in  my  opinion,  more  worthy  of  refent- 
ment  than  of  ferious  notice.  His  main  drift  is  to  evade  the 
force  of  Mr.  B/s  argument,  by  making  out,  that  that  which 
filled  the  houfe  where  they  were  fitting  was  only  found,  and 
therefore  could  not  be  that  in  which  they  were  baptized.  But 
found  might  be  there  put  for  the  fpirit,  as  it  is  elfewhere  for 
the  precious  truths  and  promifes  of  the  gofpel ;  as  in  Plal. 
lxxxix.  15.  "  Blefied  is  the  people  that  know  the  joyful  found." 
And  in  Rom.  x.  18.  "  Their  found  went  into  all  the  earth," 
Sec.  and  hence  it  is  clear,  that  the  houfe  and  themfelves  were 
not  only  filled  with  the  fpirit,  but  that  they  were  alfo  over- 
whelmed with  it. 

Again,  as  the  prophet  judged  cf  the  abundance  of  rain  by 
the  found,  fo  we  in  general  judge  of  the  power  and  magnitude 
of  things  by  their  found  ;  and  when  an  hiftorian  would  convey 
to  his  readers  an  idea  of  the  power  and  magnitude  of  a  thing, 
the  found  of  which  they  have  not  heard,  he  does  it  by  com- 
paring its  found  with  the  found  of  fomething  which  they  have 
heard ;  and  thus  by  a  comparifon  of  the  founds  enables  them 
to  realize  the  proportionate  degree  of  power  and  magnitude  in 
the  two  objects  from  which  the  founds  proceeded.  Thus  the 
prophet,  Dan.  x.  6,  "  The  voice  of  his  words,  like  the  voice  of 
a  multitude."  Thus  the  Revelator,  Rev.  i.  15,  "  His  voice,  as  the 
found  of  many  waters."    Thefe  paflages  imply,  that  the  angel, 


C         75         ] 

if  it  were  not  Chrift  himfelf,  had  the  power  of  fpeaking  equal  to 
that  of  a  multitude:  That  the  power  of  Chrift  to  lift  up  his  voice, 
was  equal  to  the  power  of  many  waters  to  roar  ;  and  indeed 
the  only  object  of  magnifying  his  voice  by  this  figure,  was  to 
magnify  the  idea  of  his  power  and  greatnefs.  And  thus,  the 
penman  of  the  Acts,  to  defcribe  the  abundance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  which  was  poured  out  upon  the  apoftles,  and  the  power 
of  its  operations*,  compares  the  found  of  it  to  that  of  a  mighty 
mining  wind  ;  who  then  can  believe  that  there  was  not  a  fuf- 
ficiency  to  overwhelm  them  ?  The  amount  of  Mr.  E'sreafoning 
upon  this  point,  is  limply  this  :  That  though  there  was  much 
noife,  there  was  but  little  wind.  That  though  there  was  a  great 
found,  there  was  but  little  fpirit,  juft  enough  to  fprinkle  or  pour 
a  little  on  their  heads. 

But  when  we  compare  this  mighty  effufion  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
upon  the  twelve  apoftles,  which  we  know  to  have  been  fuch 
by  its  mighty  found,  with  the  fprinkling  of  a  dozen  infants,  or 
the  pouring  of  a  dozen  cupfulls  of  water  upon  the  heads  of  fo 
many  adults  ;  all  his  pretended  arguments,  whimfies,  cavils  and 
conjectures  retire  at  once,  and  to  ufe  a  phrafe  which  he  has  bor- 
rowed from  Mr.  B.  hide  their  impertinent  heads.  His  abufed 
lexicon  now  deferts  him,  fmce  it  is  clear  that  the  fpirit  was 
poured  out — Ihed  forth  and  come  upon  the  apoftles,  abundant- 
ly fufficient  to  overwhelm  them  ;  and  though  he  thought  fo  to 
have  fixed  Mr.  B.  by  a  frivolous*  criticifm  upon  the  idea  of  im- 
merfion  as  to  have  cruftied  him  at  once  with  thefe  phrafes,  yet 
neither  Mr.  B.  nor  any  other  B?-ptift  contends  for  imruei  lion 
only  for  the  fake  of  a  burial.  For  if  a  pevfon  were  placed  in  a 
vat,  or  in  any  fituationin  which  water,  by  being  poured  out,  or 
Ihed  forth,  might  come  upon  him  fo  as  to  overwhelm  and  bury 
him,  his  baptifm  would  be  juft  as  valid  as  though  he  had  been 

*  I  wish  to  be  candid,  and  therefore  sometimes  think  that  such 
terrrn  and  phrases  arc  t')o  severe  ;  but  when  I  look  sgain  into  Mr. 
f.'s  book,  I  think  I  am  not  half  severe  enough. 


[         76         ] 

put  under  the  water  by  immerfion ;  although  immerfion  be 
the  molt  convenient  and  cuftomary  form. 

And  no\v,Hhat  the  reader  may  fee  what  conceflions  the  Pas- 
do  Baptiits  have  made  to  *us  with  regard  to  the  mode  of  bap- 
tifm,  as  well  as  the  fubjeft ;  I  will  here  add  a  few  extracts  from 
Mr.  Booth's  quotations  from  them,  upon  that  point — and  firft 
with  regard  to  the  meaning  of  the  word. 

Salmasiue:  "  Baptifm,  is  immerfion  ;  and  was  adminifler- 
ed,  in  ancient  t&nesj  according  to  the  force  and  meaning  of  the 
word.  Now  it  is  only  rkaniifn,  or  fprinkling  ;  not  hmnerfton, 
or  dipping."     In  Px4o  Baptifm  exam.  vol.  1,  p.  44. 

Gurtlerus  :  "  To  baptize,  among  the  Greeks,  is  undoubt- 
edly to  imiaerfe,  to  dip  j  and  baptifm,  is  immerfion,  dipping." 
—Ibid. 

N.  B.  The  Greek  words  in  the  quotations  are  chiefly  in 
Greely  characters  j  but  thofe  of  them  which  are  included  irj^the 
extracts,  I  have  thought  proper  to  confter  into  Bn^ifW  /*-* '  c  ^- 

Gomarus  :  "  Baptifmos  and  Baptifma,  fignify  the  act:  of 
baptizing:  that  is,  either  plunging  alone ;  or  immerfion,  and 
the  confequent  warning." — P.  45. 

Bp.  Reynolds:  "  The  fpirit  under  the  gofpel  is  oompared — 
to  water ;  and  that  not  a  little  meafure,  to  fprinkle,  or  bedew, 
but  to  baptize  the-faithful  in,  Mat.  iii.  11,  Acts  i.  5,  and  that 
not  in  a  font  or  veffel,  which  grows  lefs  and  lefs,  but  in  a  fpring, 
or  Kving  river,  John  vii.  39.  There  are  two  words — which  fig- 
nify fuffering  of  afflictions,  and  they  are  both  applied  unto 
Chrift,  Matt.  xx.  22.  Are  ye  able  to  drink  of  the  cup  that  I  mail 
drink  or,  or  be  baptized  with  that  baptifm  that  I  am  baptized 
with  ?  He  thatdrinketh  hath  the  water  in  him  ;  he  that  is  dip- 
ped or  plunged,  hath  the  water  about  him  :  fo  it  notes  the  uni- 
verfality  of  the  wrath  which  Chrift  fuffered." — P.  45,  46. 

Calvin:  "  The  word  baptize,  fignifies  to  immerfe ;  and  the 
rite  of  immerfion  was  obfervcd  bv  the  ancient  church." — P.  46. 


I       <'"       3 

Beza  :  "  Chrift  commanded  us  to  be  baptized  ;  by  which 
Word  it  is  certain  immerfion  is  fignified." — Ibid. 

Danish  Catechism  :  "  What  is  Chriftian  dipping '?  Water, 
in  conjunction  with  the  word  and  command  of  Chrift.  What  is 
that  command  which  is  in  conjunction  with  water  ?  Go  teach  all 
nations,  and  fo  on,  Matt,  xviii.  19,  Mark  xvi.  15,  16.  What  is 
implied  in  thefe  words  ?  A  command  to  the  dipper  and  the 
dipped,  with  a  promife  of  falvation  to  thofe  that  believe.  How 
is  this  Chriftian  dipping  to  be  adminiftered  ?  The  perfon  muft 
be  deep-dipped  in  v/ater,  or  overwhelmed  with  it,  in  the  natne 
of  God  the  Father,  and  fo  on." — P.  46,  47. 

Vitringa  :  '*  The  act  of  baptizing,  is  the  immerfion  of  be- 
lievers in  water.  This  exprefles  the  force  of  the  word.  Thus 
alfo  it  was  performed  by  Chrift  and  his  apoftles." — P.  47. 

Beck  man  us  i  "Baptifm,  according  to  the  force  of  its  ety«- 
mology,  is  immerfion,  and  warning,  or  dipping.'* — P.  47. 

Bucanus:  "Baptifm,  that  is,  immerfion,  dipping,  and, 
by  confequence,  waihing.  Baptiftry,  a  vat,  or  large  vefTel  of 
wood,  or  ftone,  in  which  we  are  immerfed,  for  the  fake  of 
Waihing.     Baptift,  one  that  immerfes,  or  dips." — Ibid. 

Burmanijus:  "  Baptifmos  and  baptifma,  if  you  confider 
their  etymology,  properly  fignify  immerfion.  And  Jefus,  when 
he  was  baptized,  went  up  Jlraitway  out  of  the  water"  Matt, 
iii.  16,  compare  Acts  viii.  38. — P.  48. 

Mr.  John  Trapp  :  "  Are  ye  able  to — be  baptised  with  the 
baptifm  ;  or  plunged  over  head  and  ears  in  the  deep  waters  of 
afflidion  ?"— Ibid. 

Hospinianus  :  "  Chrift  commanded  us  to  be  baptized ;  by 
which  word  it  is  certain  immerfion  is  fignified." — P.  49. 

Diodati  :  "Baptized,  viz.  plunged  in  water — In  baptifm, 
being  dipped  in  water  according  to  the  ancient  ceremony,  it  is 
a  facred  figure  unto  us,  that  fin  ought  to  be  drowned  in  us,  bf 
God's  fpirit."— Ibid, 

0  3 


I  78  ] 

Calmet  :  "  Generally  people  (fpeaking  of  the  Jews)  dap* 
peel  themielves  entirely  under  the  water  ;  and  this  is  the  molt 
fimple  and  natural  notion  of  the  word  baptifm/' — Ibid. 

Keckermannus  :  "  We  cannot  deny,  that  the  firft  inftitu- 
iioii  of  baptifm  confided  in  immerfion,  and  not  fprinkling ; 
v  Lich  is  quite  evident  from  Rom.  vi.  o,  4." — P.  51. 

H.  Clignetus  :  il  Baptifm  is  fo  called  from  immerfion,  or 
piunging  into  ;  becaufe  in  the  primitive  times  thofe  that  were 
baptized  were  entirely  immerfed  in  water." — P.  52,  53. 

Magdeburg  h  Centuriators  :  "  The  word  baptizo,  to 
.  which  (ignifies  immerfion  into  water,  proves  that  the 

niniftratorpf  baptifm  immerfed;  or  wafted,  the  perfons  bap- 
tized m  water/'* — P.  51. 

&as.  Faber  :  "Baptifm  is  immerfion,  wafting." — P.  56. 

Mr.  Daniel  Rogers:  "None,  of  old,  were  wont  to  be 
fprinkled  :  and  I  confefs  my  feif  unconvinced  by  demonftration 

cripture  for  infants'  fpr inkling.  It  ought  to  be  the  church's 
part  to  cleave  to  the  infritution,  which  is  dipping;  and  he  be- 
trays the  church,  whofe  officer  he  is,  to  a  disorderly  error,  if  he 
,e  Hot  to  the  inftitution,  which  is  to  dip.  That  theminif- 
ter  is  to  dip  in  water-  as  tbemeeteft  act,  the  word  bapt'rzo  notes 
it.  For  the  Greeks  wanted  not  other  words  to  exprefs  any 
other  act  befides  dipping,  if  the  inftitution  could  bear  it.  What 
refembiance  of  the  burial  or  the  refui  reclion  of  Chrift  is  in 
fprinkling  ?  All  antiquity  and  fcripture  confirm  that  way.  To 
dip,  therefore,  is  exceeding  material  to  the  ordinance ;  which 
was  the  ufage  of  old,  without  exception  of  countries,  hot  or 
cold."— P.  5S,  57. 

J.  J.  WsrsTENius  :  "  To  baptize,  is  to  plunge,  to  dip." — 
i\  59. 

Dr.  BoiNDkiDGE  :  "  I  have  indeed — a  moft  dreadful  baptifm 
to  be  baptized  with,  and  know  that  I  mall  fhortly  be  bathed 
as  it  were  in  blood,  and  plunged  in  the  moft  overwhelming  dif- 
trelb."-— P.  59,  GO. 


[  79  1 

Zepperus:  "If  we  confider  the  proper  meaning  of  the" 
term,  the  word  baptifm  fignifies  plunging  into  water,  or  the 
very  act  of  dipping  and  warning.  It  appears,  therefore,  from 
the  very  fignification  and  etymology  of  the  term*  what  wa3 
the  cuftom  of  adminiftering  baptifm  in  the  beginning  ;  where* 
as  we  now,  for  baptifm,  rather  have  rhantifm,  or  fprinkling." 
—P.  60* 

Mr.  Poole's  Continuators  :  "  To  be  baptized,  is  to  be 
dipped  in  water ;  metaphorically,  to  be  plunged  in  afflictions, 
I  am,  faith  Chrift,  to  be  baptized  with  blood,  overwhelmed  with 
fufferings  and  afflictions." — Ibid. 

Walrus  :  "  The  external  form  of  baptifm  isimmerfion  in- 
to water,  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Spirit." — Ibid. 

Articles  of  Smalcald  .  "Baptifm  is  no  other  than  the 
word  of  God,  with  plunging  into  water,  according  to  his  ap* 
pointment  and  command." — Ibid. 

Anonymous  :  "  That  the  letter  of  fcripture  is  in  favour  of 
the  Baptifts  (or  as  they  are  flill  abiurdiy  called,  Ana-Baptifts) 
cannot,  without  evafion  and  equivocation,  be  denied*" — Ibid* 

Mr.  Wilson  :  "  To  baptize,  to  dip  into  water,  or  plunge 
one  into  the  water." — P.  61. 

Schrevelius  :  "  Baptize,  to  baptize,  to  plunge,  to  warn." 
—P.  62. 

Pas  or  :  "  Baptizo,  to  baptize,  to  immerfe,  to  wain." — lb* 

Trommius  :  " Baptizo,  to  baptize,  to  immerfe,  to  dip." — ■ 
Ibid. 

MintErt  :  "  Baptizo,  to  baptize  ;  properly,  indeed,  it  fig» 
nines  to  plunge,  to  immerfe,  to  dip  into  water  :  but  becaufe  it 
is  common  to  plunge  or  dip  a  thing  that  it  may  be  waffled*, 
hence  alfo  it  fignifies  to  wafh,  to  warn  away — Baptifmos*  bap* 
tlfm:  immerfion,  dipping  into;  walhing,  waffling  away.  Prop* 
erly,  and  according  to  its  etymology,  it  denotes  that  waihkig 
which  is  performed  by  immerfion."-- P,  $3. 


[  80  ]  t 

Scapula:  "  Baptizo,  to  baptize,  to  dip,  or  immerfe;  as 
we  immerfe  any  thing  for  the  purpofe  of  dyeing,  or  cleanfing 
in  water.  Alfo  to  dip,  to  plunge,  to  overwhelm  in  water." — 
tbid. 

Hedericus  :  "  Baptizo,  to  baptize ;  to  plunge,  to  immerfe, 
to  overwhelm  in  water  ;  to  warn  away,  to  warn.  Baptifrna, 
baptifm  ;  immerfion,  dipping  into." — Ibid. 

Constantius:  "  Baptifmos,  baptifm;  the  acl  of  dyeing, 
that  is,  of  plunging." — Ibid. 

Stockius:  "  Baptifma,  baptifm — generally,  and  in  virtue 
of  its  etymology,  it  fignifies  immerfion,  or  dipping  into.  Par* 
ticularly  and  properly,  it  denotes  the  immerfion  or  dipping  of 
a  thing  into  water  j.  that  it  may  be  cleanfed  or  warned." — Ibid. 

There  are  a  number  of  other  coiicefiions  to  the  fame  import;, 
but  thefe  mail  fuffice  in  the  prefent  cafe.  But  how  exceeding- 
ly  unfair  is  Mr.  E.  to  infinuate,  with  all  the  force  he  could 
without  averting  the  fact,  which  he  dare  not  do,  but  refts  the 
whole  upon — if  fo — if  iO)  as  in  p.  93,  94,  that  Mr.  B.  hpsmade 
thefe  authors  concede  what  they  never  did  concede,  viz.  that 
baptifm  means  immerfion,  and  immerfion  only  ;  when  Mr.  B. 
has  introduced  the  quotations  with  a  note  fpecifying  the  con- 
trary, with  regard  to  a  number  of  them.  Let  the  reader  how- 
ever examine  for  himfelf,  and  he  will  find,  that  fome  of  them 
have  fully  conceded  that  baptifm  means  immerfion  only  ;  and 
that  properly  fpeaking  fprinkiing  is  ^haniijy.i^  and  not  agreea- 
ble to  the  nature  of  the  inilitution.  Others  admit,  and  indeed 
all  imply,  that  the  primary  force  and  meaning  of  the  word  is 
immerfion.  The  firft,  then,  can  have  no  other  plea  for  their 
praclice,  but  general  cuftom ;  and  the  reft  have  built  it  upon  a 
remote  and  fecondary  fenfe  of  the  term.  But  cuftom  alone  can 
have  no  weight  in  a  cafe  like  this,  and  Mr.  B.  has  fhewn,  from 
Buddeus,  Chamier,  Dr.  Owen,  Schelhornius,  Weren- 
felsius,  Dr.  Sherlock,  Bp.  Taylor,  Dr.  Jonathan  Ed- 
wards, Dr.  Horsley,  Vitringa,  Dr.  Waterland,  and 


[  81  ] 

others,  that  there  is  but  one  genuine  fenfe  of  a  text — That  '  if 
the  fcripture  have  not  every  where  one  proper  determinate 
fenfe,  it  hath  none  at  all :' — That  '  the  true  fenfe  of  fcripture,  is 
not  every  fenfe  the  words  will  bear:'— That  'the  law  muft  be 
expounded  according  to  the  mojl  plain  and  obvious  fignification 
of  the  words:' — That  *  in  the  interpretation  of  the  laws  of  Chrift, 
the JiriB  fenfe  is  to  be  followed :'— That  'he  that  takes  thzjirjl 
fenfe  is  the  likelieft  to  be  well  guided:' — That  '  if  we  take  the 
liberty  of  playing  upon  words  after  the  meaning  is  fixed  and 
certain,  there  can  be  no  fecurity  againft  equivocation  and  wilef 
in  any  laws;'  and  'that  all  the  ends  and  ufes  of  fpeech  will  here- 
by be  perverted.' 

But  the  following  from  Mr.  B.  himfelf,  p.  131,  is,  in  my 
opinion,  quite  conclufive  upon  this  point.  "  If  plunging,  pour- 
ing, and  fprinkling,  be  equally  'valid,  it  muft  be  becaufe  they 
are  equally  enjoined  by  divine  law.  But  they  are  three  different 
actions,  as  before  proved,  and  as  all  the  world  will  acknow- 
ledge, in  reference  to  any  other  affair.  How  then  fhall  a  (ingle 
term,  u  ffclerftood  in  its  proper  and  primary  fenfe,  equally  refpect 
three  different  actions  ?  Yet  an  equal  refpect  they  muft  have 
from  a  fingle  term  of  pofitive  divine  law,  to  render  them  per- 
fectly 'equivalent,  equally  valid.'  Before  Mr.  Horsey  pre- 
tends to  evince,  that  the  word  baptizo  has  this  plenitude  of  fig- 
nification, we  wifh  him  to  prove,  that  any  term,  in  any  lan- 
guage, either  does  or  can  equally  and  naturally  fignify  three  dif- 
ferent actions.  A  word  that  has  three  fenfes  equally  proper  and 
natural  to  it,  is  indeed  equivocal :  nor  has  it,  properly  fpeak- 
ing,  any  determinate  fenfe  at  all.  It  is  a  mere  term  without  an 
idea,  and  deferves  to  be  banifhed  from  the  language  to  which 
it  belongs."  Now,  there  is  no  way  that  I  can  fee,  to  avoid  the 
force  of  this  reafoning  upon  juft  and  fair  principles  ;  and  hence 
Mr.  E.  and  others  have  been  forced  to  change  the  common 
ground,  and  deny  that  the  word  baptifm  refers  to  the  manner 
of  applying  to,  and  ufmg  water  in  the  adminiftration  of  the  or- 


dinance ;  and  iniift,  that  the  meaning  of  it  is  confined  wholly 
and  folely  to  the  operation  of  the  water  upon  the  fubject,  viz. 
*.uett'i7igy  or  qjjajhing.  But  how  unhappy  is  it  for  them,  that 
fuch  a  refpetlable  number  of  their  learned  friends  have  joined 
with  the  Baptifts  in  affirming,  that  it  means  to  warn,  only  as  a 
confequence  of  immerfion  or  plunging  ;  and  indeed  all  of  them 
who  admit  the  firji  fenfe  of  the  word  to  be  immeriion,  are 
wholly  againft  Mr.  E.  for  this  fairly  implies  that  warning  is  on- 
ly a  confequence. 

We  will  now  attend  to  what  a  number  of  thefe  worthy  au- 
thors have  faid  of  "  the  defign  of  baptifm  ;  or  the  facts  and 
blefiings  reprefented  by  it,  both  in  regard  to  our  Lord  and  his 
difciples." 

Witsius  :  "  Immerfion  into  the  water  k  to  be  confidered 
by  us,  as  exhibiting  that  dreadful  abyfs  of  divine  juftice,  in 
which  Chrift,  for  our  fins,  which  he  took  on  himfelf,  was  for  a 
time  as  it  were  abforbed  ;  as  in  David,  his  type,  he  complains, 
Pfalm  lxix.  3,  More  particularly,  feeing  fuch  an  immei^on  de- 
prives a  perfon  of  light,  and  of  other  things  pertaining  to  this 
world,  it  excellently  reprefents  the  death  of  Chrift  ;  while  his 
continuance  under  water,  however  fhort,  denotes  the  burial  of 
Chrift,  and  the  loweft  degree  of  his  humiliation  ;  when,  being 
laid  in  a  fepulchre  that  was  fealed  and  guarded  by  the  Roman 
foldiers,  he  was  confidered  as  entirely  cut  off.  Emeriion  out 
of  the  water,  exhibits  an  image  of  his  refurrec"tion,  or  of  the 
victory  which,  being  dead,  he  obtained  over  death  in  his  own 
dark  domains,  that  is,  the  grave.  Ail  thefe  things  the  apoftle 
intimates,  Rom.  vi.  3,  4."  In  P<zdo  Baptifm  exam.  vol.  1, 
p.  148. 

Dr.  Robert  Newton  :  "Baptifm  was  ufually  performed 
by  immerfion,  or  dipping  the  whole  body  under  water,  torep- 
refent  the  death  and  burial  and  refurre&ion  of  Chrift  together ; 
arid  therewith  to  fignify  the  perfon's  own  dying  to  fin,  the  de- 


[       ss       ] 

ftruction  of  its  power,  and  his  refurrection  to  new  life.     St. 
Paul  plainly  refers  to  this  cuitom.    Rom.  yi,  4." — P.  149. 

A.  H.  Frankius  :  "  The  baptifm  of  Chrift  reprefented  hif 
fufferings,  Matt.  xx.  22  ;  and  his  coming  up  out  of  the  water 
his  refurrection  from  the  dead." — Ibid. 

Mr.  Rich.  Baxter  :  "  In  our  baptifm,  we  are  dipped  un- 
der water,  as  fignifying  our  covenant  profeflion  that  as  be  was 
buried  for  fin,  we  are  dead  and  buried  to  fin — They  (your  lulls 
are  dead  and  buried  with  him,  for  fo  your  baptifm  fignifieth 
in  which  you  are  put  under  the  water,  to  fignify  and  profefs 
that  your  old  man  is  dead  and  buried — We  3*4  raifed  to  holi 
nefs  by  his  fpirit,  as  we  rife  out  of  the  water  in  baptifm — Col 
ii.  1 1, 12,  13  :  where  note — that  the  putting  of  the  body  unde: 
the  water  did  fignify  our  burial  with  Chrift,  and  the  death,  o: 
putting  off  of  our  fins." — Ibid. 

M.  Saurin  :  "  Paul  fays,  We  are  buried  with  him  by  bap- 
tifm into  death  ;  that  is,  the  ceremony  of  wholly  immerling  u 
in  water,  when  we  were  baptized,  fignified,  that  we  died  to  fin 
and  Aat  of  raifing  us  again  from  our  immerfion  fignified,  tha 
we  would  no  more  return  to  thofe  diforderiy  practices,  in  whicl 
we  lived  before  our  converiion  to  Chriitianity." — P.  150. 

Dr.  T.  Goodwin  :  "  The  eminent  thing  fignified  and  repre 
fented  in  baptifm,  is  not  limply  the  blood  of  Chrift,  as  it  <wajh 
eth  us  from  fir. ;  but  there  is  a  further  representation  therein  ol 
Chrift's  death,  burial,  and  refurrection,  in  the  baptized' s  beinj 
firft  buried  under  water,  and  then  riling  out  of  it ;  and  this  i 
not  in  a  bare  conformity  unto  Chrift,  but  in  a  reprefentation  o 
a  communion  with  Chrift,  in  that  his  death  and  refurrection.' 
—Ibid. 

Turrettinus  :  "The  paflage  of  the  Ifraelites through  th< 
Red  Sea,  wonderfully  agrees  with  our  baptifm,  and  reprefent 
the  grace  it  was  defigned  to  exprefs.  For  as  in  baptifm,  whei 
Performed  in  the  primitive  manner,  by  immerfion  and  emerfion 
defcending  into  the  water,  and  again  going  out  of  it,  of  whicJ 


[■  84  ] 

defcent  and  afcent  we  have  an  example  in  the  Eunuch,  A&s 
viii.  38,  39  :  yea,  and  what  is  more,  as  by  this  rite,  when  per- 
fons  are  immerfed  in  water,  they  are  overwhelmed,  and  as  it 
were  buried,  and  in  a  manner  buried  together  with  drift  ;  and 
again,  when  they  emerge^  feem  to  be  raifed  out  of  the  grave, 
and  are  faid  to  rife  again  with  Chrift,  Rom.  vi.  4,  5  ;  Col.  ii. 
12  :  fo,  in  the  Mofaic  baptifm,  we  have  an  immerlion,  and  an 
emerfion  ;  that,  when  they  defcended  into  the  depths  of  the 
fea  ;  this,  when  they  went  out  and  came  to  the  oppofite  fliore. 
The  former,  was  an  image  of  death ;  the  tetter,  of  a  refurre«- 
tion.  For,  paffing  through  the  bottom  of  the  fea,  were  they 
not  near  to  death  ,?  and  efcaping  to  the  oppofite  fhore,  were 
they  not  as  if  revived  from  the  dead  ?" — P.  151. 

Pp.  Patrick  :  "  They  (the  primitive  Chriftians)  put  off  their 
old  clothes,  and  ftript  themfelves  of  their  garments ;  then  they 
were  immerfed  all  over,  and  buried  in  the  water,  which  nota- 
bly fignified  the  putting  off  the  body  of  the  fins  ofthefe/b,  as  the 
apoftle  fpeaks,  and  their  entering  into  a  ftate  of  death  *>r  mor- 
tification after  the  fimiiitude  of  Chrift  j  according  to  the  fame 
apoftle's  language  elfewhere,  We  are  baptized  into  his  death—- 
We  are  buried  with  him  by  baptifm." — P.  152. 

Botsaccus:  "  Baptifm  is  a  fepulchre :  We  are  buried  with 
Chrift  by  baptifm  into  death,  Rom.  vi.  4." — P.  153. 

Buddeus  :  "  Immerfion,  which  was  ufed  in  former  times, 
was  a  fymbol  and  an  image  of  the  death  and  burial  of  Chrift ; 
and  at  the  fame  time  it  informs  us,  that  the  remains  of  fin, 
which  are  called  the  old  man,  mould  be  mortified." — Ibid. 

Dr.  Whitby  :  "  Therefore  we  are  buried  with  him  by  bap- 
tiftn,  plunging  us  under  the  water,  into  a  conformity  to  his 
death,  which  put  his  body  under  the  earth  ;  that  like  as  Chrijl 
was  raifed  up  from  the  dead,  by  the  glorious  power  of  the  Fat her ; 
evenfo  we  alfo,  thus  dead  in  baptifm,  fhould  rife  with  him,  and 
yjalk  in  newnefs  of  life" — P.  153,  154, 


t        S5        ] 

Pictetus  :  "  That  immerfion  into,  and  emcrfion  out  of  the 
water,  practifed  by  the  ancients,  fignify  the  death  of  the  old* 
and  the  refurrection  of  the  new  man,  Rom.  vi.  Col.  ii."— P.  1 54. 

Bp.  Davenant  :  "  In  baptifm,  the  burial  of  tlie  body  of 
fin,  or  of  the  old  Adam,  is  reprefented,  when  the  perfon  to  be 
baptized  is  put  down  into  the  water  ;  as  a  refurre&ion,  when 
he  is  brought  cut  of  it.'' — Ibid. 

Grotius:  "Buried  wiib  him  by  baptifm.  Not  only  the 
word  baptifm,  but  t;he  very  form  of  it  intimates  this.  For  an 
immerfion  of  the  whole  body  in  water  fo  that  it  is  no  longer 
beheld,  bears  an  image  of  that  burial  which  is  given  to  the  dead. 
So,  Col.  ii.  12 — There  was  in  the  baptifm  as  adminiftered  in 
former  times  an  image  both  of  a  burial  and  of  a  renirreciion, 
which  in  refpect  of  Chrift  was  external ;  in  regard  to  Chrif- 
tians  internal.     Horn.  vi.  4." — P.  U5,  15G. 

Mr.  B.  has  quoted  upwards  of  fixty  authors  more  to  the 
fame  import;  and  I  fometimes  think,  that  the  Baptifts  them- 
felves  cannot  fay  any  thing  more  or  better  in  favour  of  their 
own  principles  and  practice,  than  they  have  done.  But  if  they 
are  right  about  the  defign  of  baptifm,  they  muft  of  courfe  be- 
lieve, as  well  as  we,  that  John  the  Baptift,  the  apbftles  and  firft 
Christians,  practifed  accordingly.  Let  us  hear  them  concerning 
that: 

Lenfant  :  "  In  the  water — in  the  Holy  Ghofh  Taefe 
words  do  very  well  exprefs  the  ceremony  of  baptifm,  which 
was  at  firft  performed  by  plunging  the  whole  body  in  water,  as 
alio  the  copious  effufion  of  the  Holy  Ghoft  on  the  day  of  pen- 
ticoft." — In  Pcedo  Baptifm  exam.  vol.  1,  p.  191. 

Anonymous  :  "  If  we  have  regard  to  the  manner  in  which 
the  idea  of  baptifm  is  naturally  adapted  to  the  fituation  of  a 
guilty  creature,  zealous  to  exprefs  his  abhorrence  of  iin  ;  or  to 
the  general  practice  of  the  Jewiih,  as  well  as  other  eaftern  na- 
tions ;  to  the  example  of  our  Lord,  and  of  his  difciples  ;  and 
to  the  molt  plain  and  obvious  conftru&ion  of  the  Greek  Ian- 

H 


E  86  ] 

guage ;  we  lhall  be  inclined  to  believe  that  infant  fyrinhlxng  is 
not  an  inftitntion  of  Chriftianity,  but  a  deviation  from  the  ori- 
ginal rite,  which  was  performed  by  dipping,  or  plunging  into 
water. — The  arguments  by  which  the  Predo  Baptifts  fupport 
their  practice  and  doctrine  appear  to  us  to  be  fo  forced  and  vio- 
lent, that  we  are  of  opinion,  nothing  but  the  general  prevalence 
of  infant  fprinkling  could  have  fo  long  fupported  it." — P.  191, 
192. 

Gurtlerus:  "  The  action  in  this  element  of  water,  is  im- 
merfion ;  which  rite  continued  for  a  long  time  in  the  Chriftian 
church,  until,  in  a  very  late  age,  it  was  changed  into  fprink- 
ling."— P.  \\)'2. 

Mastricht:  "The  fign  reprefenting,  or  the  element  in 
baptifm,  is  water,; — the  fign  applying  is  warning — whether  it 
be  performed  by  immerlion,  (Matt.  iii.  6,  16.  John  hi.  w. 
Acts  viii.  :)8,)  which  only  was  ufed  by  the  apoftles  and  primi- 
tive churches." — P.  190,  194. 

Calvin  :  "  From  thefe  words,  John  in.  25,  it  may  be  in- 
ferred, that  baptifm  was  adminiftcred  by  John  and  Chriit,  by 
plunging  the  whole  body  under  water — Here  we  perceive  how 
baptifm  was  administered  among  the  ancients  ;  for  they  immcrf- 
ed  the  whole  body  in  water.  Now  it  is  the  prevailing  prac- 
tice for  a  niiniiler  only  to  fprinkle  the  body  or  the  head." — P. 
194. 

Vitringa  :  "  The  act  of  baptizing,  is  the  immerlion  of  be- 
lievers in  water.  This  exprettes  the  force  of  the  word.  Thus 
alfo  it  was  performed  by  Chrift  and  the  apoftles." — Ibid. 

Z  an  cm  us:  "  The  ancient  church  ufed  to  immerfe  thofe 
that  were  baptized/' — P.  196. 

Hoornbeekius  :  "  We  do  not  deny — that,  in  the  firft  exam- 
ples of  perlons  baptized  they  went  into  the  water  and  were  im- 
meried."— Ibid. 

Dai  lle  :  "  It  was  a  cuflom  heretofore  in  the  ancient  church, 
1o  plunge  thofc  they  baptized  over  head  and  ears  in  the  water. 


t         87         ] 

This  is  ftill  the  practice  both  of  the  Greek  and  the  Ruffian 
church,  even  at  this  very  day." — Ibid. 

Salmasius:  "The  ancients  did  not  baptize  otherwife 
than  by  immerfion,  either  once  or  thrice." — P.  197. 

Mr.  Bower  :  "  Baptifm  by  immerfion,  was  undoubtedly  the 
apoftolical  practice." — Ibid. 

Mr.  Poole's  Continuators:  "  It  is  true,  the  firft  bap- 
tifms  of  which  we  read  in  holy  writ,  were  by  dippings  of  the 
per fon s  baptized.'" — Ibid. 

Bp. Taylor:  "  The  cuftom  of  the  ancient  churches  was 
not  fprinkling,  but  immerfion  ;  in  purfuance  of  the  fenfe  of  the 
word  (baptize)  in  the  commandment,  and  the  example  of  our 
Saviour."— P.  199. 

Clignetus:  "In  the  primitive  times,  perfons  baptized 
were  entirely  immerfed  in  water." — Ibid. 

Curcell^us  :  "  Baptifm  was  performed  by  plunging  the 
whole  body  into  water,  and  not  by  fprinkling  a  few  drops,  as 
is  now  the  practice." — P.  203. 

Mr.  Rich.  Baxter-:  "  We  grant  that  baptifm  then,  (in  the 
primitive  times)  was  by  warning  the  whole  body  ;  and  did  not 
the  differences  of  our  cold  country,  as  to  that  hot  one,  teach  us 
to  remember,  I  qvill  bwve  mercy  and  not  Sacrifice,  it  fhould  be 
fo  here — It  is  commonly  confefTed  by  us  to  the  Anabaptifls, 
as  our  commentators  declare,  that  in  the  apoftles'  times  the 
baptized  were  dipped  over  head  in  the  water." — P.  206,  207. 

Mr.  T.  Wilson  :  "  Baptifm  was  performed  in  the  primi- 
tive times  by  immerfion." — P.  208. 

Assembly  of  Divines:  "  Were  baptized.  Wafhed  by 
dipping  in  Jordan,  as  Mark  vii.  4.  Keb.  ix.  10. — Buried  with 
him  by  baptifm.  See  Col.  ii.  12.  In  this  phrafe  the  apoftle 
feemeth  to  allude  to  the  ancient  manner  of  baptifm,  which  was 
to  dip  the  parties  baptized,  and  as  it  were  to  bury  them  under 
the  water  for  a  while,  and  then  to  draw  them  out  of  it,  and  lift 


L       as       ] 

them  up.  to  represent  the  burial  of  our  old  man,  and  our  refur- 
redtion  to  newnefs  of  life." — Ibid. 

Dr.  Whitby  :  "  It  being  fo  exprefsly  declared  here,  (Rom. 
vi.  4,)  and  Col.  ii.  12,  that  we  are  burled  with  Chrlflin  baptifm, 
by  being  buried  under  water  ;  and  the  argument  to  oblige  us 
to  a  conformity  to  his  death,  by  dying  to  fin,  being  taken  hence  ; 
and  thisimrnsrfion  being  religioufly  obferved  by  all  Chris- 
tians for  THIRTEEN  CENTURIES,  and  approved  by 
cur  church,  and  the  change  of  it  into  fprinkling,  even  without 
any  allowance  from  the  author  of  thisinftitution,  or  any  licenfe 
from  any  council  of  the  church,  being  that  which  the  Roman- 
ia ftill  urgeth  to  juftify  his  refufal  of  the  cup  to  the  laity  ;  it 
were  to  be  wiihed,  that  this  cuftom  might  be  again  of  general 
life,  and  afpernon  only  permitted,  as  of  old,  in  cafe  of  the  Clin- 
ic!, or  in  prefent  danger  of  death." — P.  219. 

Thefe  are  extracts  from  but  twenty  quotations  cut  of  nine- 
ty-fix, upon  this  p2rt  of  the  fubject.  But  thefe  conceffions, 
that  the  apoflles  and  primitive  Chriftians  praclifed  immerfion, 
3  weight  to  the  former  idea,  that  baptiim  was  originally  de- 
signed as  a  repreientation  of  a  death,  burial,  refurrection,  &c. 
:d>  they  lead  us  to  think,  that  immerfion  anfwers  a  better 
purpoie  in  that  refpeet,  than  any  other  way.  Perhaps  fomeof 
ihcfc  authors  may  help  us  here  again  a  little. 

U'itsius  :  f?  It  mufl  not  be  didembled,  that  there  is  in  im- 
merfion a  greater  fruitfulnefs  of  fignification,  and  a  more  per- 
fect correfpondence  between  the  lign  and  the  thing  fignified." 
— In  Pjsdo  Baptlfm  exam.  vol.  1,  p.  273. 

Alstediuo:.  "  The  rite  of  immerfion,  which  is  intimated 
by  the  very  word  baptiim,  certainly  bears  a  greater  analogy  to 
the  thing  fignified.,, — Ibid. 

Estius  :  "  Hence  therefore  the  ceremony  of  pouring  7  as  a 
medium  between  dipping  and  Sprinkling,  was  much  ufed ; 
which  cuftom,  Bonaventure  fays,  was  in  his  time  much  ob- 
ferved in  the  French  churches  and  fome  others ;  though  he  con- 


t        89      4 

feiTes  that  the  ceremony  of  imrrierfion  was  the  more  common, 
the  more  fit,  and  the  more  fafe,  as  S.  Thomas  teaches/' — P. 
274. 

Mr.  W.  Perkins  :  "  Dipping  doth  more  fully  reprefent  our 
fpiritual  warning,  than  fprinkling." — P.  £75. 

Mastricht  :  "Immerfion  —  was  ufcd  by  the  apoftles  and 
primitive  churches,  becaufe  it  is  not  only  more  agreeable  in  the 
warm  eaftern  countries,  but  alfo  more  figuificant,  Rom.  vi.  3, 
4,  5."— Ib;d. 

H.  Alt  i  n  g  i  u  s :  After  briefly  ftating  the  arguments  for  plung- 
ing and  for  fprinkling,  he  adds,  "  Weconiefs,  firft,  that  immcr- 
lion  was  the  prior  rite  ;  becaufe  it  was  firft  ufcd  by  John  the 
Baptift  and  the  apofties.  Secondly,  it  is  alfo  more  eXpreffive, 
on  account  of  the  diftinct  acts,  Rom.  vi." — Ibid. 

M.  Morus:  "Baptifm  was  formerly  celebrated  by  plung- 
ing the  whole  body  in  water,  and  not  by  calling  a  few  drops 
of  water  on  the  forehead  ;  that  reprefenting  death  and  the  ref- 
urrection  much  better  than  this." — Ibid. 

They  tell  us  alfo  how  pouring  and  Iprinkling  firft  came  into  ufe. 

Pamelius  :  "  Whereas  the  lick,  by  rcafon  of  their  illnefs, 
could  not  be  immerfed  or  plunged,  (which,  properly  fpeaking, 
is  to  be  baptized  ;)  they  had  the  falutary  water  poured  upon 
them,  or  were  fprinkled  with  it.  For  the  famereafon,  I  think, 
the  cuftom  of  fprinkling  now  ufed,  firft  began  to  be  obferved 
by  the  weftern  church."— P.  284. 

Hoornbeekius  :  "In  the  eaftern  churches  baptifm  was 
more  anciently  adminiftered  by  immerfing  the  body  in  water. 
Afterwards,  firft  in  the  weftern  churches,  on  account  of  the 
coldnefs  of  the  countries,  bathing  being  lefs  in  ufe  than  in  the 
e-aft,  and  the  tender  age  of  thofe  that  were  baptized,  dipping  or 
fprinkling  was  admitted." — Ibid. 

But  pairing  over  more  than  a  dozen  befides,  we  muft  intro- 
duce fome  account  from  Dr.  Wall  l.ere.  "  France  feems  to 
have  been  the  firft  country  in  the.  world,  where  baptifm  by  af- 

H2 


L  90  j 

fufion  was  ufed  ordinarily  to  perfonsin  health,  and  in  the  pub- 
lic way  o:r  adminiftering  it — It  being  allowed  to  weak  children 
{in  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth)  to  be  baptized  by  afper- 
rion;  many  fond  ladies  and  gentlewomen  firft,  and  then  by  de- 
grees the  common  people,  would  obtain  the  favour  of  the  pried 
to  have  then  .  pais  for  weak  children,  too  tender  to  en- 

•  in  the  water — And  for  fprinkling  properly  called, 
it  feems  it  was,  at  fixteen  hundred  and  forty-five,  juft  then  be- 
ginning, and  ufed  by  very  few." — And  fpeaking  of  the  Ajfem- 
b'y  of  Divides,  he  fays,  "  They  reformed  the  font  into  a  balin. 
ty  could  not  remember,  that  fonts  to  bap- 
tize In,  had  been  always  ufed  by  the  primitive  Chriftians,  long 
re  the  beginning  of  Popery,  and  ever  fince  churches  were 
built  i.  but  that  fprinkling,  for  the  common  ufe  of  baptizing, 
was  really  introduced  (in  France  firft,  and  then  in  other  Popifh 
countries)  in  times  of  Popery.  And  that  accordingly,  all  thofe 
countries  in  which  the  ufurped  power  of  the  Pope  is,  or  has  for- 
merly been  owned,  have  LEFT  OFF  dipping  of  children  in  the 
font :  but  that  all  other  countries  in  the  world,  which  had  never 
regarded  his  authority,  do  fill  ufe  it ;  and  that  basins,  except 
in  cafe  ofnecefjity,  were  never  ufed  by  Pap'ifts,  or  any  other  Chrif- 
tians  whatfoever,  till  by  the?4SELVES.j> — P.  288,  289,  290. 
Now,  taking  the  whole  together,  two  things  are  made  very 
clear:  1.  That  the  Baptifts  are  in  full  polTeffion  of  the  true 
original  fcripture  mode  of  baptifm*  2.  That  the  beft  founda- 
tion for  pouring  or  fprinkling,  is  either  a  bare  conjecture  that 
the  apofi^es  and  primitive  Chrifrians  did  fometimes  practife  it ; 
or  a  remote  or  itraincd  fenfe  cf  the  word  baptifm,  ai.a  a  forced 
and  contracted  kind  pf  analogy  which  it  bears  to  the  thing  fig- 
nified  ;  or  the  peculiar  circumftances  attending  weak iy  and  fick 
perfeiis,  and  cold  climates.  Thefe  I  fay,  either  feparately  or 
in  conjunction,  confritute  the  belt  foundation  for  pouring  or 
fprrokling ;  for  though  fome  have  added  other  things,  they  are 
altogether  inferior.    But  is  it  not  quite  as  much  as   Chriliiaf* 


t  91  ] 

charity  can  do  with  all  its  faith,  to  believe  it  pofliblc,  that  real 
Chriftians  mould  fo  fully  and  frankly  confefs  the  truth,  and  yet 
as  if  it  were  to  fupplant  it,  deviate  from  it,  and  fubftitute,  id 
pradife  fomething  elfe  in  its  place  upon  fuch  fiender  grounds 
as  thefe  ?  Suppofe  the  word  baptifm  hadathoufand  n  >ani 
and  Chrift  had  chofen  and  appropriated  one  of  them  for  par- 
ticular ufe. to  his  caufe  and  followers,  and  given  it  a  public  'auc- 
tion by  conforming  to  it  himfelf ;  fhould  not  that  hi*  accounted 
fufficient  to  determine  and  fettle,  not  only  the  opinion,  but  the 
pradice  of  every  one  who  pretendedly  made  him  their  guide 
and  leader  ;  Certainly  it  fhould.  For  otherwife,  as  Dr.  Qs- 
wald  obferves,  "To  take  advantage  of  dark  furmifes,  or  doubt- 
ful reafoning  to  elude  obligations  of  any  kind,  is  always  looked 
upon  as  an  indication  of  a  difhoneft  heart."* 
I  have  now  a  few  things  to  fay, 

OF    THE    USE    OF    INFANT    BAPTISM. 

Upon  this  part  of  the  fubjed,  Mr.  Edwards  fays,  p.  93,  "I  do 
not  fappofe  that  infants,  properly  fpeaking,  receive  any  prefcnt 
benefit  by  being  baptized,  but  that  this  is  deligned  the  more  to 
engage  the  attention  of  parents  and  others  to  the  rifing  genera- 
tion. I  view  infants  when  baptized,  under  the  notion  of  per- 
fons  entered  into  a  fchool ;  and  therefore,  I  confider  parents, 
paftors,  deacons,  and  church-members  at  large,  as  brought  un- 
der an  additional  obligation  to  inftrud  thofe  children  who  are 
become  fcholars,  as  they  become  able  to  learn,  in  the  peculiar 
truths  of  the  religion  of  Chrift.  Viewing  the  matter  in  this 
light,  it  afTumes  an  importance  exceedingly  grand." 

So  it  may  appear  to  Mr.  E.  but  quite  differently  to  me.  In 
my  opinion,  a  fchool  founded  upon  the  p£do  Baptift  fcheme, 
has  a  much  greater  tendency  to  pervert  the  peculiar  truths  of 
the  religion  of  Chrift,  in  the  minds  of  young  pupils,  than  to  in- 
culcate them  in  their  purity.     For, 

Firft — The  fcheme  infufes  into  their  minds  wrong  notions  of 
the  covenant  of  grace,  and  the  true  spiritual  promife ;  which 

*  In  Pado  J3aptim  exam,  2d  edit,  vol,  J,  p.  3 SO. 


I         92         ] 

the  foundation  of  the  religion  of  Chrift.  It  confound*  them 
with  the  Jewifh  covenant,  and  its  promifes,  and  makes  then 
all  one — the  confequence  of  which  is,  a  fubftitution  of  the  law 
for  grace.  For  he  who  teaches,  or  he  who  learns,  that  the  cov- 
enant of  circumciiion  is  the  covenant  of  grace,  teaches  or  learns 
the  law  for  grace ;  which  is  a  fatal  miftake  in  matters  of  di- 
vinity. 

Secondly* — It  infufes  into  their  minds  wrong  notions  of  the 
gofpel  church,  confounding  it  with  the  Jewiih  church,  as  tho' 
there  were  no  efiential  difference  between  then* — The  confe- 
rence of  which  is,  a  fubftitution  of  a  lega  .al  church,  in 
the  place  of  a  congregation  of  believers.  For  he  who  teaches* 
or  he  who  learns,  that  the  Jewifh  and  Chi  :U:.;n  church  are  ef- 
feajtially  the  fame,  teaches  or  learns  the  propriety  o£ 
incorporating  whole  families  and  nations  into  churches ;  and 
hence  the  introduction  of  thofe  multitudes  of  LegaHfts  and 
gracelefs  perfons,  which  the  P^do  Baptifts  have  always  fbftfcr- 
ed  in  a  public  profeflion  in  their  churches,  like  the  um 
part  of  the  Jewifh  church  of  old. 

By  this  kind  of  tuition  it  is,  that  Popery  fcopacy 

have  made  a  Way  '"nto  the  vifible  church  for  their  different  or- 
ders of  priefts  and  clergy,  with  a  worldly  fanluary,  and  its 
modes  and  forms  of  worihip,  after  the  manner  of  the  Jc 
priefts,  and  Temple  worihip  under  the  law.  By  this  alfo  it  ir, 
that  mhltitudes  are  led  to  believe  in  the  propriety  of  blending 
church  and  ftate  under  the  gofpel,  as  they  were  amongfi  the 
Jews ;  and  that  the  civil  and  ecclefiaftical  powers  mould  com- 
bine their  force  at  the  head  of  the  community,  and  have  church 
and  ftate  eftabliihed  together,  and  mutually  regulated  and  fup- 
ported  by  law* 

Thirdly — It  infufes  into  their  minds  wrong  notions  of  the 
true  feed,  or  heirs  of  the  promife,  as  though  they  were  nothing 
more  than  the  natural  defcendants  of  believers  ;  or  at  moil, 
nicji  as  have  been  baptized — the  confequence  of  which  is,  a 


[         93         ] 

fubftitution  of  natural  defcent,  or  baptifm,  in  the  place  of  re- 
generation and  faith.  Now,  the  Predo  Baptifts  may  fuppofe, 
that  infants  become  heirs  of  the  promife,  either  by  virtue  of 
natural  defcent  alone ;  or  by  their  parents  becoming  their  guar- 
dians, while  in  a  ftate  of  minority  ;  or  in  ccnfequence  of  their 
being  born  with  a  fuppofed  principle  of  grace  within  them ; 
or  by  virtue  of  their  being  baptized.  But  whether  they  fix  up- 
on one,  or  another,  or  all  of  thefe  points  together,  or  any  thing 
elfe  of  the  fame  nature,  it  muft  be  altogether  abfurd  and  inef- 
ficient ;  for  nothing  of  the  kind  amounts  to  the  true  qualifica- 
tions of  the  heirs  of  the  promife.  "If  ye  be  Chrift's,"  that  is, 
if  ye  be  perfonally,  and  individually,  parents  and  children,  true 
believers  in  Chrift,  and  fo  truly  belong  to  Chrift,  "  then  are  ye 
Abraham's  feed,  and  heirs  according  to  the  promife." — Gal.  iii. 
29.  I  know  the  Paedo  Baptifts,  from  policy  or  the  want  of  the 
right  underftanding  of  it,  often  work  this  pafTage  in  their 
fcheme;  but  whenever  I  find  it  attached  to  the  carnal  feed,  I 
confefs,  that  in  a  moral  point  of  view,  the  fight  is  as  unfeemly, 
as  the  object  to  which  Solomon  compares  a  fair  woman  with- 
out difcretion. 

Fourthly — No  fyftem  can  be  taught  in  a  Paedo  Baptift  fchool 
confidently,  but  the  Arminian.  The  Arminians,  with  regard 
to  life  and  falvation,  confound  law  and  grace,  and  build  upon 
them  as  the  fame ;  and  therefore,  may  affirm  with  the  utmoft 
confiftency,  that  the  two  covenants  and  churches  are  eficntially 
the  fame ;  and  if  this  be  the  grand  bafe  of  infant  baptifm,  the 
whole  neceflarily  belongs  to  their  fyftem.     Therefore, 

Fifthly — How  aftonifhingly  inconfiftent  are  the  Calvjniftic 
Paedo  Baptifts,  to  teach  the  fyftem  of  grace  for  life  and  falva- 
tion, and  reject  the  law  entirely  ;  while  with  regard  to  bap- 
tifm, and  the  conftitution  of  the  vifible  church,  theyinfift  upon 
the  lavv  to  the  exclufion  of  the  gofpel  p'an.  None,  as  Ave  fug- 
gefted  in  p.  55,  are,  nor  can  be  confiftent  with  themfelves  in 
thefe  matters,  but  the  ftrict  Calviniftic  Baptifts,  who  build 


[         04         ] 

throughout  upon  the  gofpel ;  or  the  complete  Arminian  Paedo 
Baptifts,  who  build  altogether  upon  the  law. 

Sixthly — The  grand  object  of  infant  baptifm  is,  whether  Mr. 
E.  will  own  it  or  not,  to  fecure  the  falvation  of  infants  till  they 
become  capable  of  acting  for  themfelves  in  thefc  things,  and  as 
a  foundation  for  them  to  build  upon  afterwards,  if  they  fhould 
furvive;  and  hence  fome  profelTed  Calvinifts  teach,  that  if  par- 
ents will  get  their  children  baptized,  and  perform  their  other 
duties  towards  them,  they  will  undoubtedly  be  fandified  and 
faved  :  See  alfo  the  Public  Formulas,  p.  61.  I  am,  therefore, 
furprifed  at  cnr  Calvini^ic  Paedo  Baptifts  for  complaining,  as 
fome  ©f  them  do,  of  the  Arminians  for  preaching  up,  that  if 
people  will  do  thus  and  fo  for  a  feries  of  time,  they  will  un- 
doubtedly be  converted  and  become  good  Chriftians ;  for  it  is 
the  very  fame  thing  which  they  do  in  the  other  cafe,  between 
the  parents  and  children — only  they  fubftitute  the  parents  to  do 
the  children's  duty,  becaufe  they  cannot  do  it  themfelves — the 
very  principle  upon  which  God-fathers  and  God-mothers  were 
firffc  appointed  for  them.  And  if  the  children,  when  they  be- 
came of  age,  in  this  cafe,  ought  to  come  and  take  the  covenant 
upon  themfelves,  and  perform  the  duties,  and  fo  look  for  the 
bleffings  of  it,  I  am  fure  the  Arminians  cannot  be  blame-wor- 
thy for  urging  it  upon  them. 

The  Arminians,  yea,  the  Papifts  and  Epifcopalians,  are  alfo 
much  more  confident  in  many  ether  refpecls,  than  are  the  Cal- 
viniftic  Paedo  Baptifts:  for  if  baptifm  be  regeneration,  as  they 
affirm,  they  have  none  under  a  vifible  profefTion  in  their  church- 
es, but  regenerated,  heaven-born  fouls;  whereas  the  others 
encourage  multitudes  of  profeifors  in  their  churches,  who,  ac- 
cording to  their  own  confeflions  of  regeneration  and  grace,  are 
only  Lcgalifts,  and  downright  hypocrites.  I  have  heard  fome 
Paedo  Baptifts  of  late  complain,  that  their  minifters  do  not 
preach  up  the  doctrines  of  grace  fo  fully  and  pointedly,  and 
prefs  them  home  with  that  force  and  energy,  they  could  wifh : 


[         95         ) 

but  they  do  not  confider  that  they  have  two  forts  of  profeffors 
to  preach  to ;  and  that  to  prefs  the  gofpel  fo  clofe  upon  the  le- 
gal part,  as  the  aportles  and  primitive  preachers  did,  that  they 
muft  either  be  true  Chriftians,  or  be  call  out  like  Hagar  and  her 
fon,  would  operate  directly  againft.  their  conftitution,  and  per- 
haps deprive  thern  of  far  the  greater  part  of  the  members  of 
their  churches. 

Seventhly — It  is  a  fact,  that  the  mere  infant  baptifm  has  pre- 
vailed in  any  part  of  the  world,  the  more  Legaiifts,  minifters 
and  profeffors,  have  inereaied  and  governed  the  church;  and  in 
former  times  thefe  fons  of  Hagar  have  feldom  failed,  when  an 
opportunity  offered,  of  excrcifing  the  fame  fpirit  towards  the 
true  Ifrael  of  God,  as  their  elder  brother  Ifhmael  lhewed  tow- 
ards Ifaac;  moving  the  civil  power  againft  them,  with  all  its 
force — ruining,  murdering,  and  perfecuting  thoufands,  in  the 
moft  cruel  and  unrelenting  manner.  It  is  alfo  obfervable,  of 
churches  and  individuals,  that  juft  fo  far  as  they  have  derived 
their  religion  from  both  of  the  covenants,  they  have  imbibed  the 
fpirit  of  both.  Thus  Calvin,  clear  in  the  doctrines  cf  grace  with 
refpect  to  falvation,  cut  his  way  through  the  myriads  of  Pope- 
ry, and  feemed  topromife  the  faint3  a  fpeedy  emancipation  from 
the  corruptions  and  tyranny  of  Antichrift ;  but  ftill  under  the 
vail  of  Mofes  about  the  nature  and  conftitution  of  the  church, 
he,  with  regard  to  that,  retained  the  old  covenant  to  build  up- 
on, and  withtjt  a  proportionate  degree  of  that  Ifhmaelitim  fpir- 
it which  was  fo  peculiar  to  the  carnal  Jews :  For,  becaufe  the 
Baptifts  denied  the  Jewifh  and  Chriitian  church  to  be  effentiaily 
the  fame,  he  reprefents  them  as  holding,  "that  the  Jews  knew 
nothing  of  eternal  life;  and  that  their  promifes  and  adminiftra- 
tio:i  had  no  prefpeot  but  to  temporal  advantage r"  and  this  he 
charged  upon  poor  Servetuj,  as  one  of  his  pernicious  errors, 
on  account  of  which  he  perfecuted  him  to  ruin. 

Eighthly — The  Psedo  Baptifts  are  divided  about  the  right  of 
children  to  the  covenant.    Some  Congregationalifvs  in  Vermont, 


t       as       ] 

crouded  by  the  doctrines  of  grace,  have  placed  infant  bap- 
tiim  as  far  from  the  church  as  they  can  and  retain  it.  If  I  un- 
derftand  them  right,  they  will  not  have  them  baptifed  becaufe 
they  are  heirs  of  the  promife,  or  in  the  covenant,  nor  to  bring 
them  into  the  covenant,  nor  church ;  but  they  feem  to  think, 
that  when  God  makes  a  covenant  with  a  man,  as  with  Abra- 
ham, &c.  it  matters  not  where  the  fign,  or  token,  is  placed— 
whether  on  his  houfe,  lands  or  children — provided  it  be  under- 
ftood  by  it  that  their  owner,  net  themfelves,  is  in  covenant  with 
God,  and  belongs  to  his  church ;  and  that  upon  this  principle 
the  children  of  Abraham  were  circumcifed,  and  thofe  of  be- 
lievers mould  now  be  baptized.  But  this  notion  is  utterly  in- 
confiftent  with  both  covenants  and  churches ;  for  it  is  certain 
that  Abraham's  children  were  taken  into  the  firft,  and  were 
members  of  the  church:  and,  on  the  other  hand,  it  militates  - 
againft  every  gofpel  idea  of  the  ordinance  of  baptifm. 

Ninthly,  and  laftly — Pasdo  Baptifm  is  calculated  to  infufe  in- 
to the  minds  of  young  pupils  that  notion  of  fuperiority  which 
the  Jews  had,  and  thus  to  operate  againft  that  natural  equalib^ 
among  men,  which  is  fo  efientially  neceflary  to  the  well-bertigr, 
of  fociety.  I  need  not  fay  that  both  parents  and  children  have 
been  infatuated  with  it,  and  reflected  upon  others  as  heathens, 
becaufe  they  were  not  baptifed. 

From  thefe  few  hints,  it  will  be  feen,  that  the  methods  and 
matter  of  inftruction  in  the  different  Pas  do  Baptiit/communities 
muft  not  only  be  various  and  contradictory;  but  that  infant 
baptifm,  inftead  of  afiuming  that  importance  which  Mr.  E.  at- 
taches to  it  as  the  foundation  of  a  fchooi  in  any  refpect,  has 
been  the  fource  of  fome  of  the  molt  capital  errors  in  church 
and  ftate,  and  which  heretofore  have,  by  their  confequences, 
involved  a  great  part  of  mankind  in  calamity  and  diftrefs. 

N.  B.  I  have  thought  it  needless,  to  attempt  an  answer  to  Air.  E.'s 
arguments  against  the  Baptist  system,  in  the  first  part  of  his  book  ; 
for  if  his  own  scheme  be  refuted,  ours,  iu  spite  of  all  those  argu- 
ments, stands  a^  it  was  before. 


■    '       "  Was  "*>  late  ">  correct  them  ia  pIace. 

PAGE  21,  line  29,  from  f},a  <-.      j? 

J>         14,  ior  thefe,  read  thofe. 
37,        22,  for  met,  read  met  ^kb. 
38>  4,  for  change,  read  a  change 

»  J  6,  ror  Heb.  vn.  14,  read  13. 
53,  10,  for  Heb.  ix.  24,  read  2a? 
*»»         19,  for  law,  read  a  law. 

7,  for  Bohemus,  read  Bohemius 

23,forLuDou,cuS)readLuDov.cus. 
0,  from  tne  top,  for  iS6,  read  12& 

17,  for  the  fpirft,  read-  o/the  ipirft. 

l2,fromthebottom,forbyChrift)read0/Chri(l- 

ioforM,:top,forMath-x™-re« 

V °'  fol  MAQM3«=»,  read  MiSM,MG 


53, 

7, 
58, 

59, 

60, 

77, 
78, 


y 


A 

SCRIPTURAL  ANSWER 

TO  THE 

REVEREND  DAVID  PORTER's 
DISSERTATION 

ON 

CHRISTIAN  BAPTISM, 

AND    THE   SUBJECTS     THEREV/ITH    IMMEDIATELY    CON- 
NECTED,   COMPRISED  IN 

A  SERIES  OF  SECTIONS. 
BY  HEZEK'IAH  PETTIT. 

He  thai  is  first   in  his  own  cause,   seemeih  just  ;     but  his 

neighbor  cometh  and  searcheth  him.  Prov.  xviii.  17. 
Add  thou  not  unto  his  words,  lest  he  reprove  iheey  and  thou 

be  found  a  liar.  Prov.  xxx.  6. 

Doth  a  fountain  send  forth  at  the  same  place   sweet  water 

cud  bitter  ?  James  i;i.  1  1. 

**  To  be  candid  to  error y  is  to  bs  a  traitor  to  Christ  and  Lis 

Kingdom." 

CATSK1LL  : 
PRINTED   BY    MAC  KAY    CROSWELL. 

l8lO. 


PREFACE. 


TO   THE   READER,. 

IN  compofing  this  Work,  I  have  been  par- 
ticular in  confining  myfelf  to  foliow  the  Rev- 
Mr.  Porter's  own  manner  of  arranging  the 
fubjecr.  His  title  page  fays,  M  A  DiiTcrtation 
on  Chriftian  Baptifm,  and  the  fubjecls  there- 
with immediately  connected. *''  But  I  coniider 
there  are  many  things  that  he  has  written  large- 
ly on  that  are  not  at  ail  connected  with  water 
Baptifm.  However,  to  anfwer  his  objection 
againft  what  I  thought  to  be  truth,.  I  have  pur- 
fued  his  own  track,  but  would  with  the  reader 
to  underitand  that  I  do  not  view  his  fubjecr  ar- 
ranged as  it  is  in  the  Word  of  God,  The  read- 
er will  find  what  I  have  quoted  from  his  Sec- 
tions, marked  with  double  commas,  and  if  any 
part  of  it  is  not  quoted  verbatim,  as  it  Hands 
in  his  Book,  it  is  a  mifrake  and  not  a  defign  ; 
though  I  believe  there  are  no  fuch  miftakes. 
-As  it  is,  I  fubmit  it  to  thy  confiderarion,  ho- 
ping it  may  be  carefully  perufed,  compared 
with  the  Rev.  David  Porter's,  both  weigh- 
ed in  the  Word  of  Gcd,  and  the  reader  difj  ofed 
to  embrace  the  truth,  and  reject  the  error — 
which  is  the  prayer  of  thy  fervant,  for  Jems' 
fake.  THE  AUTHOR. 


JZ~  "*-» 


*_      J 


A  Scriptural  Anfwer,  &ev 


•K^©"}^ 


THE'firfl  thing  that  I  (hall  notice,  in  remarking  on 
your  baptifmal  Difcourfe,  will  be  your  explana- 
tion of  the  covenant  of  redemption,  which  explanation 
I  fully  agree  with,  faving,  that  while  you  fly  1c  it  the 
covenant  of  redemption,  you  fhould  havtf  ftated  that  it 
was  the  covenant  of  grace,  as  it  was  a  gracious  plan  to 
redeem  ;  which  makes  ifcemphatically  both.  The  firfl: 
reafon  I  fhall  offer  on  this  ftatement  will  be,  an  exami* 
nation  of  what  you  call  the  covenant  of  grace,  compared 
with  your  own  definition  of  the  word  covenant.  In 
your  treatife  on  this  fubject  you  forbear  to  tell  us,  with 
whom  the  covenant  of  grace  was  firft  made ;  except 
what  you  imply  in  the  13th  page,  in  which  you  fay, 
that  "  fmce  the  fall  of  Adam,  there  has  been  no  other 
covenant  exifting  between  God  and  men,  except  the 
covenant  of  grace."  By  which  you  defrgn,  either  to 
have  us  underftand,  that  this  covenant  was  made  be- 
tween God  and  man,  or,  to  leave  your  reader  to  find 
out  from  Tome  other  teacher,  with  whom  it  was  made. 
To  believe,  that  you  intended  to  leave  this  point  In  the 
dark,  in  order  that  your  reader  might  take  that  for 
granted  which  you  dare  not  alTert,  I  am  unwilling  to 
fuppofe.  Yet  one  of  thefe  two  conclufiona  muft  be 
made  j  for  you  tell  us  in  the  fame  page,  that  "  the  cove- 
nant of  grace  is  founded  on  the  covenant  of  redemp- 
tion. M  And,  in  the  14th  page — that  «*  there  never  has 
been,"nor  ever  will  be,  but  one  covenant  of  grace."  And, 
that  •*  the  fame  covenant  has  been  renewed  from  time 
t9time,whh  additional  appendages,  fuch  as  God  law  belt. 


fuited  to  the  circumfbnces  of  his  people  ;  but  the  cove- 
nant itfelf  has  undergone  no  change.  The  covenant  of 
grace  was  ratified  with  Abraham,  on  his  being  come 
the  friend  of  God.  To  him  God  gave  more  underftanding 
icfpedting  this  covenant,  than  to  any  who  had  gone  be- 
fore him.  At  this  time  was  added  an  external  feal,  by 
which  Abraham  was  riidinguiihed  from  all  others  by  a 
vifible 'mark.  The  fame  feal  God  enjoined  Abraham 
to  place  upon  himfeif,  was  by  him  to  be  applied  to  his 
male  cfFspringj  which  being  done,  fhouM  denote,  that 
ihey  were  with  him  in  covenant."  Ail  which  flill  leaves 
us  in  the  dark  concerning  with  whom  this  covenant  was 
fir tt  made.  If  vou  did  not  mean  to  have  us  underftand, 
that  this  covenant  was  made  between  God  and  men, 
why  did  you  not  tell  us  with  whom  it  was  made  ?  And 
it  I  am  to  underftand  that  it  was  made  between  God 
and  men,  J  would  again  a(k$  with  what  man  or  number 
of  men,  it  was  firft  made?— again  a(k,  what  the  condi- 
tion to  be  performed  on  man's  part,  then  was,  or  now  is  ? 
For  you  have  juftly  told  us,  in  your  firft  ftatemsnt,  that 
<(  a  covenant  is  an  agreement  between  twoor  more  perfons 
or  parties,  in  which  fomething  is  to  be  done  by  both, 
that  neither  (hould  be  injured,  and  the  one,  or  the  oth- 
.  er,  or  both  receive  a  real  good.  And  fuch  cove- 
nant when  ratified  is  binding  on  the  parties,  till  one 
or  the  other  fails  of  performing  his  part,  or  violates  the 
articles  of  agreement.  After  iuch  agreement  is  broken 
bv  the  one  party,  the  other  party  is  no  longer  held,  and 
may  treat  the  violator  as  though  no  covenant  had  ever 
ex i lied  between  them,  or  according  to  the  penalty  an- 
nexed to  the  violation. " 

-  From  tail  ftatement,  which  is  thus  far  a  very  juft 
one  ;  you  fay,  fomething  mull  be  done  by  both  parties, 
in  all  covenants,  or  all  is  null  and  void.  Would  you  wifii 
me  to  underftand  from  your  faying,  in  the  14th  page, that 
«4  Abraham  having  taken  hold  of  this  covenant  of  grace 
by  faith  j"  that  faith  is  the  condition,  on  man's 
part,  to  be  performed  ?  This,  I  think,  you  cannot  deny,    ■ 


9 

for  it  is  the  tenor  of  your  argument;  And,  in  the  15th 
page,  you  fay,  that  "The  part  to  be  performed  by  Abra- 
ham, was  to  exhibit  the  fruits  of  faith."  In  the  fame 
page  you  tell  us  •«  Abraham's  children  were  included 
with  him  in  the  covenant."  The  fum  of  it  then  is  ; 
that  the  work  to  be  done  by  Abraham  and  his  children, 
is  faith  and  its  fruits  :  And  if  this  condition  be  not  ful- 
filled, all  is  null  and  void,  for  the  covenant  is  broken. 
If  fo,  you  have  already  told  us,  that  the  other  party  is 
not  holden.  Then,  according  to  this  plan,  Abraham 
and  his  children  are  forever  loft  if  they  do  not,  (to  ufe 
your  own  language)  exhibit  the  fruits  of  faith*  The 
plain  queflion  then  is,  whether  faith  be  an  a£t  of  the 
creature,  or  the  gilt  of  God  ?  If  it  be  an  a£l  performed 
by  the  creature,  then  the  Arminian  world  are  right  m 
their  creed,  and  the  Apoftle  was  wrong.  And  if  it  is 
the  gift  of  God,  then  it  was  not  the  work  of  Abraham  ; 
consequently,  Abraham  and  his  children  could  not  fulfil, 
'on  their  part ;  and  you  have  already  allowed  in  the  13th 
page,  that  faith  is  the  gift  of  God  ;  of  courfe,  your 
fcheme  of  the  covenant  of  grace,  in  itfelf,  confounds  k- 
felf.  And  you  tell  us  again,  (fpeaking  of  the  cove- 
nant of  works,)  **  obedience  was  to  fecure  happinefs, 
difobedience  was  to  forfeit  it  and  incur  ruin" — page  12. 
Which  is  tacitly  owning,  that  in  all  covenants*  where 
works  are  to  be  performed  as  a  condition  of  the  cove- 
nant, that  fo  far  as  it  is  depending  on  that  condition,  it 
muit  neceflarily  be  called  a  covenant  of  works.  What 
propriety  can  there  be,  in  admitting  the  idea,  that  the 
covenant  of  grace,  on  which  all  the  happinefs  of  God's 
ek&  muft  necefFarily  depend,  was  ever  made  with,  or 
to  be  fulfilled,  by  fallen,  imperfect  and  helplefs  man, 
who  is  by  no  means  able  to  perform  the  leaft  holy  ac~t, 
or  exercife  one  holy  thought.  And  is  it  not  unreafona- 
ble  to  fuppofe,  that  the  infinitely  wife  God,  who  ever 
knew  that  this  was  the  fituation  of  mortals,  when  raid- 
ing a  church,  aorainft  which,  the  gates  of  hell  fhould 
rot  prevail,  fhould  lay  no  better  foundation  than  this  ? — 
Would  kh  be  ft  beloved  Son,  leave  his  bkfl  abode,  and 


entire  the  pains  of  death,  and  the  hot  difpleafure  of 
his  heavenly  Father,  if  all  at  laft  are  to  turn  on  fuch  un- 
certain foundations?  In  the  14th  page,  you  inform  us, 
that  you  M  have  been  the  more  particular  on  the  cove- 
nants, as  the  diftinclions  are  valtly  important  in  rela- 
tion to  what  (hall  enfue  in  this  treatife."  In  this  decla- 
ration, you  have  told  the  truth,  for  all  your  whole  plan 
depends  on  your  mifreprefentation  of  the  covenantor 
grace  ;  which  I  fbalt  endeavor  to  make  appear  from  the 
written  word  of  God.  I  think  that  I  have  already  {hewn « 
from  fair  argument,  that  you  was  wrong  and  unferiptu- 
ral,  concerning  with  whom  this  covenant  was  made. 

But  I  would  further  add  ;  Does  not  the  word  grace, , 
f*gnifyafreeandundefervedfavor,,beftowcdonanilldefer-- 
ving,and  hcll-deferving  creature  ?  Above,  you  have  juftly 
told  us,  that  in  all  covenants,  fomething  muft  be  done  by 
both  the  parties,  as  a  fulfilment  of  fuch  covenant :  the 
plain  import  of  a  contract  or  bargain.  Is  not  this  idea 
of  the  covenant  of  grace,  very  congenial  to  the  Armin- 
ian  plan  of  grace  itfelf  ?  They  tell  us  that  they  expecV 
to  be  faved  by  grace  ;  but  that  there  is  a  woik  for  the 
creature  to  do,  and  if  he  performs  it,  God  has  promifed 
that  he  will  fave  him  >  and  if  he  does  not  do  it,  he  will 
be  damned.  From  which,  all  is  depending  on  that 
work  that  is  to  be  done.  The  fame  may  be  faid  with 
equal  propriety  of  your  plan  of  the  covenant  of  grace  : 
For  if  the  one  party  fails,  all  is  null  and  void  :  And 
again,  what  propriety  in  calling  all  a  free  gift,  when 
fomething  is  to  be  done  by  way  of  confideration  or  con- 
dition, on  which  all  is  depending  ?.  For  without  it  all  is 
null  and  void,  according  to  your  own  plan.  The  Apof- 
tlc  had  not  this  opinion  of  grace  5  for  he  faith,  *  If  by 
grace,  then  is  it  no  more  of  works,  otherwife  grace  is  no 
more  grace/  Rom.  xi.  6.  Another,  in  which  you  have 
roifreprefented  this  covenant,  is,  in  that  you  have  blend* 
*d  together,  in  a  nioft  unfcriptural  manner,  the  cove- 
nant of  circumcifion,  made  with  Abraham,  in  which  his 
houfehold,  both  believers  and  Unbelievers  were  included-, 


9 

and  the  promifes  God  made  to  Abraham,  or  a  believer, 
which  promife  was  not  made  on  the  condition  of  cir* 
cumcifion,  neither  any  wife  connected  with  it.  That 
this  diftin&ion  is  made  in  the  Bible,  I  fhall  prove  from 
plain  Scriptare,  and  that  you  have  not  made  it  in  your 
Treatife,  I  (hall  prove  from  your  own  ttftimony.  In 
the  15th  page,  you  refer  us  to  the  17th  chapter  of  Gen- 
eris, where  you  fry  the  covenant  is  itated  at  large.  To 
this  part  of  divine  truth  I  refort  for  proof  in  this  cafe, 
compared  with  many  more.  Gen.  xvii.  7.  •  And  I  will 
eitablifh  my  covenant  between  me  and  thee,  and  thy 
feed  after  thee,  in  their  generations,  for  an  everlafting 
covenant,  to  be  a  God  unto  thee, and  thy  feed  after  thee.' 
Therein  is  contained  fome  of  the  promifes  made  on 
God's  part.  Verfe  icth.  *  This  is  my  covenant,  which 
ye  fhall  keep  between  me  and  you,  and  thy  feed  after 
thee  ;  every  man  child  among  you  fliali  be  circumcifcd.' 
Here  is  the  covenant  exprefsly  named  ;  and  the  condi- 
tion on  man's  part  to  be  performed,  named  alfo  j  which 
is  circumcifion,  the  etlential  thing,  as  it  refpects  Abra- 
ham's natural  feed  ;  as  may  be  feen  frcm  the  14th  verfe. 
«  And  the  uncircumcifed  man  child,  whofe  fleQi  of  his 
forefkin  is  not  circumcifed,  that  foul  [hall  be  cut  off 
from  his  people  ;  he  hath  broken  my  covenant.'  From 
thefs  fcriptures,itis  plain, that  this  covenant, is  a  gracious 
or  merciful  covenant  of  works;  fofar  as  covenant  is  re- 
ferred to  in  thefe  fcriptures.  This,  I  think,  you  cannot 
deny,  without  recalling  what  you  have  faid  in  the  I2«h 
page.  Concerning  the  covenant  of  works,  herein  you 
fay,  that  "  the  tenor  of  the  covenant  of  works  with  our 
firft  pr.rents  in  innocency,  was,  that  if  they  obeyed  God, 
they  fhould  enjoy  his  favor:  Obedience  was  to  fecurs 
happinefs  ;  dilobedience  was  to  forfeit  it  and  incur  ru- 
in." This  (you  fay)  "  is  properly  called  a  covenant  of 
work?,  becaufe  works  were  the  condition  on  which. the 
iiTae  was  fufpended."  May  not  the  fame  be  faid  in  the 
above  cafe,  with  equal  propriety,  fo  far  as  it  re'fpecl.3 
Abraham's  natural  feed  ?  The  uncircumcifed  man  child 
is  to  be  cut  off,  he  hath  broken. the  covenant. 


10 

Are  we  not,  to  notice  here  in  this  17th  chapter,  fomc 
of  the  fame  diftintYions  that  I  hfave  already  made,  which 
I  proroifed  to  prove  ;  I  mean,  that  there  is  a  plain  dif- 
tinttion  between  the  covenant  of  circumcifion,  inclu- 
ding Abraham's  natural  feed,  and  the  promises  God 
made  to  Abraham  and  his  fpiritual  feed  as  be- 
lievers. To  Abraham  and  his  natural  iced,  did  God 
promife  to  give  the  land  of  Canaan,  if  they  obeyed — if 
not,  the  uncircumcifed  man  child  was  to  be  cut  off,  he 
had  broken  the  covenant :  To  Abraham  and  his  fpiritual" 
feed,  as  believers,  did  God  promife  to  6e  their  God  *, 
and  not  on  uncertain  conditions,  but  on  the  immutabil- 
ity of  his  own  oath.  For  further  proof  on  this  fub- 
jetl,  let  us  liften  to  the  infpired  Apoftle,  in  his  comment 
on  it — Gal.  iv.  22,  and  onward.  *  For  it  is  written,  that 
Abraham  had  two  fons ;  the  one  by  a  bond  maid,  the 
other  by  a  free  woman.  But  he  who  was  of  the  bond 
woman*,  was  born  after  the  flefh  :  but  he  of  the  free  wo- 
man was  by  promife.  Which  things  are  an  allegory  : 
For  thefe  are  the  two  covenants  :  The  one  from  Mount 
Sinai,  which  gendereth  to  bondage,  which  is  Agar. 
For  this  Agar  is  Mount  Sinai  in  Arabia,  and  anfwereth 
to  Jerufalem  which  now  is,  and  is  in  bondage  with  her 
children.  But  Jerufalem  which  is  above,  is  free,  which 
is  the  mother  of  us  all.  For  it  is  written,  Rejoice,  thou 
barren  that  beared  not  •,  break  forth  and  cry,  thou  that 
travailcft  not  :  For  the  defolate  hath  many  more  chil- 
dren than  fhe  which  hath  an  hufband.  Now  we,  breth- 
ren, as  Ifaac  was,,  are  the  children  of  promife/  Let  us, 
for  a  moment  confider  the  difference  made  in  the  prom- 
ifes  to  thefe  two  characters.  Gal.  iv.  30.  *  Neverthe- 
less, what  faith  the  fcripturc?  Caft  out  the  bond  woman 
and  her  fon :  For  the  fon  of  the  bond  woman  fhall  not 
be  heir  with  the  foa  of  the  free  woman.*  Chap.  iii.  18. 
c  For  if  the  inheritance  be  of  the  law,  it  is  no  more  of 
promife  :  but  God  gave  it  to  Abraham  by  promife.' 
Verfe  19.  «  Wherefore  then  ferveth  the  law  ?  it  was  ad- 
ded becaufe  of  tranfgicflions,  tili  the  feed  Should  come,, 
to  whom  the  promife  was  made  ;  And  it  was  ordained 


II 

by  angeis  in  the  hand  of  a  mediator.'  I  think  thefe 
fcriptures,  with  many  others  of  a  fimilar  import,  are 
•fufficient  to  prove  what  I  prcmifed  to  :  that  is,  that 
there  was  a  plain  distinction  made  by  the  inTpired  wri- 
ters, between  the  natural  and  fpiritual  feed  of  Abraham, 
and  alfo  between  the  covenant  cf  circumcifion  and  the 
promifes  'God  made  to  Abraham  and  his  fpiritual  feed  as 
believers,  which  distinctions  are  not  found  in  your  trea- 
life-i  which  I  (hall  now  prove  from  your  own  tei'tirr.ony. 
Very  little  quotation  from  your  book  will  do  under  this 
head,  as  it  is  already  in  print,  for  the  public  eo  read  at 
their  leifure,  and  judge  for  themfelves  whether  fuch 
dillinttion  is  made  or  not.  This  point  you  confirm  ia 
the  :6th  page  j  in  which  it  is  faid-;  M  Let  us  now  for  a 
moment  compare  the  promife  of  God  to  the  believing 
gentile,  with  the  promife  made  to  Abraham,  and  fee  it 
in  fubltancc  they  do  not  perfectly  concur,  and  are  not 
one  and  the  fame."  Had  you  flopped  here,  it  might 
have  patted  for  the  truth  *,  though  it  would  have  bees 
part  in  unrighteoulnefs,  becaufe  you  were  not  careful  to 
give  your  reader  to  understand,  that  the  promife  that 
God  made  to  Abraham,  that  he  would  be  a  God  to  him, 
and  to  his  feed  after  him,  Was  to  Abraham  as  a  believer, 
and  to  his  fpiritual  feed  as  fuch.  Which  promife,  was 
not  made  on  the  condition  of  circumcifion,  nay,  there 
was  no  condition  in  the  cafe,but  what 'God  himfelf  would 
fee  were  fulfilled,  no  more  than  there  was  when  he  faith, 
<  At  this  time  will  I  come,  and  Sarah  ih all  have  a  fon' — 
which  is,  pofnively,  Sarah  (hall  have  r.  fon,  tiotwith. 
(landing  Abraham  be  old,  and  Sarah  p2ft  age  j  yet  Sarah 
ill  all  have  a  fon  ;  which  is  the  very  nature  of  all  2bfo* 
i*ic  promifes  made  to  the  children  of  God  in  al!  sees. 
*  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they  (hall  be  my  people,  fakh 
the -Lord  almighty.'  In  the  fame  page,  you  "fay,  *<  And 
is  it  not  evident  that  the  covenant  or  promife  made  to 
Abraham,  the  feal  of  which  was  circumciflcn-,  was  the 
fame  as  rhat  now  exUlin?  between  God  n^d  a*ll  believ- 
ers,  under  the  gofpel  difpenfaticn  ?"  This,  Sir,  you  have 
a  cautious  enough  to  (late  by  way  of  query*    and  i 


12 

(ball  be  bold  enough  to  an  Twer  and  fay,  No  :  3nd  pledge 
xnyfelf  to  prove  it  from  the  written  Word  of  God. 

For  proof  of  this,  liften  a  moment  to  Genefis  17th, 
where  you  fay  the  covenant  is  ftated  at  length — ver.  10. 
f  This  is  my  covenant  which  ye  (hall  keep  between  me 
and  you,  and  thy  feed  after  thee;  Every  man  child 
among  you  fhall  be  circumcifed  :'  And  ver.  14.  *  And 
the  uncircumcifed  man  child,  whofe  flefh  of  his  forefkin 
5s  not  circumcifed,  that  foul  (hall  be  cut  off  from  his 
people  •,  he  hath  broken  my  covenant  :'  Compared  with 
John  x.  28,  29.  «  And  I  pive  unto  them  eternal  life  ; 
and  they  fhall  never  perifh,  neiher  fhall  any  pluck 
them  out  ot  my  hand.  My  Father  which  gave  them 
me,  is  grea-er  than  all ;  and  none  is  able  to  pluck  them 
out  of  my  Father's  hand.'  Whatever  promifes  are  con- 
nected with  the  firft  of  thefe  quotations,  the  fulfilment 
of  them  is  depending  on  their  being  circumcifed.  For 
if  they  were  not,  they  were  to  be  cut  off  from  his  people  ; 
they  had  broken  the  covenant.  But  in  the  !aft  quo- 
tation, the  promifes  2re  abfolute  and  unconditional; 
no  condition  but  what  God  will  fulfil  ;  which  is  jufl  the 
difiin&ion  bttween  the  promifes  made  to  Abrafaam  and 
his  fpiritual  feed  as  believers,  and  his  natural  feed  as  in- 
cluded in  the  covenant  of  circumcifion.  To  the  form- 
er, God  promifed  to  be  their  God  ;  to  the  latter,  he 
promifed  the  land  of  Canaan,  if  they  obeyed.  Which 
i:  juft  the  diftincTtion  I  have  heretofore  fhewn  the  infpi- 
red  writers  did  make  •,  and  in  a  degree  fhewn  that  you 
did  not  make.  The  plain  inference  is,  that  one  of  the 
tw©  mufl  be  wrong.  In  the  fame,  i6-h  page,  you  (late, 
"  To  deny,  therefore,  that  the  covenant  with  Abraham, 
of  which  c'-rcumcifion  was  the  feal,  is  to  deny  that  a 
covenant  of  grace  has  rver  exifled."  This,  Sir,  is  very 
eafily  done,  on  bible  ground,  except  the  covenant  made 
between  the  Father  and  the  Son,  in  the  council  of  God's 
own  will,  that  God  ever  made  a  covenant  of  grace 
uith  any  of  Adam's  family  as  fuch,  cannot  be  proved 
from  the  written  word  of  God.     For  nc  fuch  flatement 


*3 

is  made  therein,  from  the  firft  of  Genefis,  to  the  end  of 
Revelations.     And  if  you  would  have  made  your  reader 
believe  that  there  were,  you  mould  have  quoted  the  test 
where  it  might  be  found.     Moreover,   Sir,  you  are  too 
well  acquainted  with  both  the  word  of  God  and  grammar, 
not  to  know,   that  a  covenant  of  grace    made  with  any 
finite  being,  muft  neeeflarily  be  a  contradiction  in  terms. 
For  if  the  word  grace,  as  the  apoftles  have  ufed  it,  means 
any  thing,   (as  certainly  it  does,)  it  means  an  uncondi- 
tional,  undeferved  favor,    bellowed  on  an  undeferving, 
and  ill-deferving  creature  5    whereas,    the  word  cove* 
nant,  according  to  your  own  explanation,  requires  fome- 
thing for  fomething.     From  which  it  may  be  feen,  that 
the  iatter  is  the  nature  of  a  contract  •,  the  former,  a  free 
gift  •,   which  two  ideas  cannot  be  blended  together  with- 
out abfurdity,  and  immediately  contrafting  the  Apoftle's 
faying,  in  which  it  is  written  :  <  And  if  by  grace,    then 
is  it  no  more  of  works ,    otherwife  grace  is  is  no  more 
grace.     But  if  it  be  of  works,  then  is  it  no  more  grace  ; 
-otherwife  work  is  no  more  work.'    Rom.  xi.  6.      The 
Apoftle  here  exhibits  an  entire  ccntraft  between  grace 
and  works,   in  point  of  juftilication  before  God  ;  (hew- 
ing, that  notwithftanding  grace  being  ihed  abroad  in  the: 
heart,  would  produce  good  works,  yet  good  works  and 
grace  could  not  go  together  in  the  work  of  juftification  ■; 
neither  could  obedience  or  good  works  be  the  condition 
or  consideration  on  which  God  bellows  grace  ;  for  then 
muft  needs  fomething  be  due,  as  he  plainly  teaches,  in 
Romans  iv.  4,  and  onward.     c  Now  to  him  that  work* 
eth  is  the  reward  not  reckoned   of  grace,    but  of  debt. 
But  to  him  that  woiketh  not,  but  believeth  on  him  that 
juftifieth  the  ungodly,  his  faith  is  counted  for  rightcouf- 
nefs.     Even  as  David  alfo  defcribeth   the  bleffcdnefs  of 
the  man,  unto  whom  God  imputeth  righceoufnefs  without 
works,  faying,  Blefod  are  they  whofe  iniquities  are  for- 
given,  and  whofe  fins  are  covered.     Blefled  is  the  man 
to  whom  (he  Lord  will  not  impute  fin.      Cometh  this 
bleffcdnefs  then  upon  the  circumcifion  only,  or  upon  the 
uncircumcifion  alfo  ?    For  wc  fay  that  faith  was  reck- 
B 


14 

oned  to  Abraham  for  righteoufnefs.  How  was  it  tl*en 
reckoned  ?  when  he  was  in  circumcifion,  or  in  uncir- 
cumcifion  ?  Not  in  circumcifion,  but  in  uncircumtifion.' 
From  thefe  psffages  it  is  made  fully  and  fairly  to  ap- 
pear, that  the  promife  thst  God  made  to  Abraham,  aba 
believer,  was  not  mr.de  on  the  condition  of  his  keeping 
the  covenant  of  circumcifion  ;  for  it  was  made  long  be- 
fore he  was  circumcifed  ;  and  hence,  it  could  not  be  on 
that  confideration.  In  the  17th  page,  you  have  quoted 
the  ApoifJe's  faying,  in  Gal.  iii.  16,  in  which  it  is  writ- 
ten ;  <  Now,  to  Abraham,  and  his  feed  were  the  prom- 
ises made.  He  faith  not,  and  to  feeds,  as  of  m*ry,  but 
as  of  one,  and  to  thy  feed,  which  is  Chrift.'  Immedi- 
ately after  this  quotation,  you  fay,  "  Here  you  note 
that  Chrift  is  uted  in  a  myftical  fenfe,  denoting  all  true 
Chriftians." 

I  here  challenge  your  authority  for  this  explana- 
tion of  this  text  ;  for  you  have  not  produced  ei- 
ther fcripture  or  reafon,  neither  cap  you.  I  think  it 
Would  have  been  a  far  more  rational  ftatement,  to  have 
let  the  plain  face  of  fcripture  bear  tcitimony  for  itfelf — 
concluding  from  thence,  that  what  the  Apoille  referred 
to,  was  in  part  explained  by  the  8'h  verl'e  of  the  fame 
chapter,  which  is,  *  and  the  fcripture,  fofefeeing  that 
God  would  juftify  the  heathen  through  faith,  preached 
before  the  gofpel  unto  Abraham,  faying,  in  thee  (hall  all 
nations  be  blefled.'  In  thee  ;  how  fhall  we  undcrftand 
this  ?  He  hath  told  us  in  the  above-mentioned  text  to 
wit,  the  16th  verfe,  *  and  to  thy  (fe^t  which  is  Qhrift.* 
Which  is  the  rcofl  reafonabie  cdr.clafion,  that  all  nati 
were  blefled  in  Abraham  as  a  man,  or  in  Chriit,  the  f/e-i 
of  Abraham,  that  is,  of  that  lineage  ?  Moreover,  if 
your  definition  were  juft,  that  Chrift  was  in  the  text, 
•fed  in  a  myftical  fenfe,  denoting  all  true  C  tfiftiane, 
how  could  the  Apoitle's  faying  be  confident,  in 
which  it  is  faid,  «  he  faith  not,  and  to  (std*,  as  cf 
many  ;  but  as  of  one,  and  to  thy  (ced,  which  is  Chrift  ? 
If  Chrift  is  here  denoting  aii  true  Chriitian?,  why  does 


*5 

the  Apoflle  fay,  frft  negatively,  «  net  as  of  many/  and 
feconrily,  pofitively,  of  one,  and  thirdly,  explanatory, 
« thy  feed,  which  is  Chrift:  ?'  In  the  I  8th  page,  you  (late, 
that  «*  The  plain  and  obvious  conftrutlion  of  the  apof- 
tk's  whole  argument  is,  that  gentile  believers  arc  in  the 
fame  covenant,  and  have  the  felf  fame  promife  made  to 
them  as  was  made  to  Abraham." 

This,  Sir,  fo  far  as  it  refpe£ls  their  both  being  in  the 
covenant  of  eternal  redemption,  as  the  gift  of  the  Fath- 
er and  the  purchafe  of  the  Son,  is  a  glorious  truth. 
But  if  you  mean  to  include  here  what  you  imply  in 
following  part  cf  the  fame  page,  that  they  all  ftood  in 
the  covenant  which  God  made  with  Abraham,  of  which 
circumcifion  was  the  feal,  it  is  not  fo  true,  notwith- 
{landing  the  pofitive  affertione  you  have  made  on  thefuh- 
jech  In  the  fame  page,  ycu  ailcrt,  that  (t  From  the 
foregoing,  and  from  a  cloud  of  palTages  befides,  running 
through  the  New  Teftament,  nothing  is  mere  clearly  to 
be  feen,  than  that  gentile  believers  have  no  other  fUnd- 
in£  in  relation  to  God,  and  are  united  to  Chrift  in  n» 
other  covenant  e::ctpt  in  that  made  with  Abraham." 

If,  Sir,  this  is  the  only  relation  that  believers  have 
with  Jefus  Chrift,  there  are  two  things  to  be  confidertd. 
ft  is,  from  the  plain  face  of  fcripture,  evety  un- 
circumrjft  d  believer  has  no  relation  to  Jefus  Chrift  \ 
for  he  hach  broken  the  covenant,  not  being  circumcifed  ; 
for  you  fay  in  the  fame  page,  "  Ic  will  be  carried  along 
in  mind,  that  circumcifion  was  the  feal  of  this  gracious 
covenant."  And  it  is  declared  in  Genefis  xvii.  14 — 
«  And  t$e  uncircumcifed  man  child,  whofe  flefli  of  his 
fore  {kin  is  not  circumcifed,  that  foul  fhall  be  cur  off 
from  his  people  :  be  hath  broken  my  covenant/  The 
fecond  thing  to  be  obferved  is,  that  Abraham  hicnfelf 
could  have  no  relation  to  Jefus  Chiift  until  the  time  the 
covenant  was  made.  And  the  Apoftie  tells  us,  fpe^king 
of  his  righreoufnefs,  that  it  was  *  not  reckoned,  in  cir- 
cuin^iion,  btft  in  u^circumciflon.,     Nay,  to  thefe  two 


1 6 

things  may  a  third  be  added.  Allowing  your  aficrtion  t® 
the  title  of  lection  iv,  that  "  water  baptifm  in  the  name 
of  the  Trinity,  a  feal  of  the  fame  covenant,  as  circumcif- 
ion,"  it  of  courfe  follows,  that  all  unbaptifed  believers 
have  no  relation  to  Jefus  Chrift.  This  argument  you 
have  farther  confirmed,  in  your  Corollary  in  the  19th 
page,  wherein  it  is  faid,  if  Abraham  being  in  covenant 
with  God,  would,  in  his Jetdy  have  broken  covenant 
with  him,  by  refuung  to  circumcife  them,  it  will  follow 
incontrovertibly,  that  chriftianc,  being  in  the  fame  cove- 
nant with  God,  and  refufing  to  place  the  feal  on  their 
offspring,  are  breakers  of  the  covenant  in  the  fame 
fcnfe." 

By  thefe  arguments,  Sir,  you juft  eflablifh  the  ground 
that  firft  gave  rife  to  infant  fprinkling  ;  which  is,  that 
baptifm  is  eiTential  to  falvatioii.  Kow  clear  and  vifible 
is  this  abominable  thing  exhibited,  and  how  undeniably 
is  it  your  own  argument.  For  if  all  believers  ftand  in  the 
covenant  made  with  Abraham,  and  have  no  other  rela* 
lion  to  fefus  Chrift,  and  the  unbaptifed  as  well  as  the 
uncircumcifed  muft  be  cut  off  for  breaking  the  covenant, 
how  eiTential  to  falvation  is  baptifm  ;  for  without  rela- 
tion to  Jefus  Chrift  there  can  be  no  falvation.  I  fhall 
leave  this  fedtion,  and  leave  an  enlightened  world  to 
judge  for  themfelves  of  the  truth  and  weight  of  fuch 
argument. 

Sir,  your  fecond  Seclion,  containing  an  examination 
of  the  Jewifh  Church,  appears  to  me  to  be  a  compound 
of  truth  and  error.  However,  the  greateft  part  of  what 
I  confider  erroneous,  I  have  already  noticed,  in  anfwer- 
ing  your  firft  fedlion.  I  fhall,  notwithftanding,  note  a 
few  of  your  obfervations  here,  and  compare  them  with 
fome  of  your  foregoing,  in  order  that  the  public  may 
fee  the  inconfiltency  of  your  own  plan. 

In  the  21ft  page,  you  obferve,.  "  It  is  true,  at  the 
time  Mofes  led  the  Ifraelites  cut  of  Egypt,  the  ordinance: 


*7 

of  the  paflbver  was  inflitutcd,  but  no  alteration  was 
then  made  which  affected  the  foundation  of  the  church 
itfelf.  Soon  after  this,  the  ce  emonial  law  was  intro- 
duced and  the  priefthood  organized,  but  all  refted  on 
ths  foundation  of  the  covenant  with  Abraham." — And 
in  the  14th  page,  firft  fection,  "  We  fee  from  the 
foregoing  ftatement  of  the  covenants,  that  all  the  an- 
tedeluvian  faints  ftood  on  the  fame  foundation,  as  the 
faints  of  every  fubfequent  period." 

Should  you  again  attempt  a  publication  of  this  kind, you 
will  find  a  ncceffity  of  explaining  to  a  candid  public  the 
myftery  contained  in  thefe  two  ftatements,  and  inform 
them  how  it  was  poflible,  for  the  faints  of  the  old  world 
to  (land  on  the  foundation  of  the  covenant  with  Abraham, 
when  as  yet  the  covenant  was  not  made,  neither  had 
Abraham  any  being.  I  think  it  not  uncharitable  here, 
to  conclude,  that  you  did  not  notice  this  abfurdity,  or 
hoped  that  your  reader  would  overlook  it.  In  your  in- 
ference in  the  22d  page,  and  fecond  feclion,  you  ailert, 
"  It  has  been  abundantly  proved,  that  the  church  under 
the  new  difpenfation,  agrees  in  every  thing  eiTential 
with  the  church  erected  in  Abraham's  family,  and  if  fo, 
between  the  jewifti  and  the  gentile  church,  there  muft 
be  a  perfect  coincidence  in  effentia's.  They  both  link 
with  Abraham,  and  of  courfe  wich  each  other."  And 
in  your  third  feclion,  pages  22'd  and  23d,  <c  If  juftice 
be  done  to  this  faction,  I  conceive  it  will  be  made  per- 
fectly evident,  that  the  church  fet  up  in  the  familv  of 
Abraham,  and  continued  till  the  coming  of  Chrift,  and 
during  his  miniftry,  is  one  and  the  fame  church,  as  that 
which  exifted  in  the  Apoftlc's  days,  and  in  every  fuccef- 
five  period  down  to  the  prefent." 

If  the  lad  of  thefe  ftatements  be  juft,  that  the  church 
of  God  is  fubftantialiy  the  fame  in  every  age,  I  aflc, 
what  propriety  in  the  firft  ?  Why  ufe  the  term  both, 
when  there  is  but  cm  ?  Why  fay  each  other,  when  it  is 
the  fame  ?  One  would  fuppofc,  that  thefe  fayings  were 
3  2 


i8 

not  fo  remote  from  each  other  as  to  have  the  former  for- 
gotten, when  the  latter  was  made.  Sir,  were  you 
wanting  in  human  learning,  like  myfelf,  this  impropri- 
ety, in  the  view  of  charity,  might  be  thought  on  more 
favorably  ;  but,  alas  !  this  is  not  the  cafe  j  and  hence 
it  mud  be  for  want  of  divine  teaching,  or  chriftian  can- 
dor. Should  this  be  thought  an  unfair  inference,  I 
could  wi(h  the  objsclor  to  point  out  what  other  infer- 
ence, can  in  honeHy  be  drawn  from  fuch  premifes. — 
Moreover  Sir,  that  your  afTertion  be  true,  that  thefe 
two  churches  were  in  effentials  the  fame,  would  admit 
of  fome  query.  In  examining  this  flalement,  which 
mainly  comprehends  the  whole  of  your  third  fection,  I 
would  firfi^aflc,  what  you  mean  by  the  application  of  the 
v/crd  eficnt-ials  ?  If  you  mean  here,  to  fpeak  only  oi  what 
is  effential  to  falvation,  I  know  nothing  elTemial  to  fai- 
vation  but  a  divine  and  faving  union  with  the  Lord  Je- 
fus  Chrift,  created  in  him,  and  Chrift  in  the  foul  the 
hope  of  glory  \  which  being  done,  the  creature  is  led 
by  the  fpirit  of  God  into  all  truth,  through  the  journey 
of  this  world,  and  at  laft  prefented  faultlefs  before  the 
throne  of  God  with  exceeding  joy,  through  the  imputed 
rijghteoufnefs  of  the  Chief  Shepherd.  Whoever  is  thus 
united  to  the  Lord  Jefus  Chrift,  is  acquitted  from  all 
guilt,  through  bis  blood  •,  ciifcharged  from  the  law  by 
their  furety  ;  renewed  by  his  fpirit,  and  faved  by  his 
£race  with  an  everlafting  falvation  in  the  kingdom  of  cur 
Father.  But  this  is  net  the  tenor  of  your  arguments, 
where  you  have  ufed  the  word  eifentials,  but  as  it  ref- 
pej£U  church  building.  The  mod  proper  method  then 
will  be,  to  enquire,  whether  there  is  no  difference  in  the 
building  of  the  Jewilh  and  gofpel  church.  The  whole 
fcope  of  your  arguments  in  the  third  feclion  is,  to  fhow 
that  there  is  not,  and  mine  in  reply  will  be  to  prove 
from  the  word  of  God  that  there  are.  In  your  23d 
page,  third  fcclion,  you  fay,  <{  that  both  confided  or  a 
fimi'lai  kind  of  members."  But  what  faith  the  fcriptures  ? 
The  members  of  the  Jewifh  church  were  Abraham's 
naiuial  feed,    and  ail  bought  wiih  his  money,  wheth- 


*9 

€r  believers  or  unbelievers.  They  held  a  perpetaal 
ftanding  in  the  church,  fo  long  as  tfcey  kept*  the  cove- 
nant of  circumcifion— a8  may  be  feen  from  Genefis  xvii.. 
13.  <  H«  that  is  born  in  thy  houfe,  and  he  that  is  bought 
vvi:h  thy  money,  mult  needs  be  circumcifed  :  And  my 
covenant  (hall  be  in  your  fls3i  for  an  everlafting  cove- 
Kant.'  The  members  of  the  gofpel  church,  were  ihofe 
that  believed  and  were  baptifed,  whether  they  were  the 
natural  feed  of  Abraham  or  not.  As  may  be  feen  from 
Acls  ii.  41,  47.  *  Then  they  that  gladly  received  his 
word  were  b-ptifed  :  and  the  fame  day  there  were  ad- 
ded unto  them  about  three  thoufand  fouls.  And  the 
Lord  added  to  the  church  daily  fuch  as  mould  be  fived.' 
In  page  25th,  fection  third,  you  obferve,  that  M  Before, 
as  well  as  fince  the  gofpel  day,  God  required  a  holy 
temper  of  heart,  to  conftitute  a  Handing  iu  the  church, 
acceptable  to  himfelf." 

This  aflertion  is  like  the  whole  of  your  treatife,  a  com- 
pound of  truth  and  error.  That  God  requires  perfect 
holinefs  of  all  his  creatures,  is  a  glorious  truth  ;  and  a 
requifition  perfectly  reafonable  in  the  nature  of  things  1 
But  that  all  that  were  not  fuch,  were  by  the  exprefs 
command  of  God  cut  off,  fo  long  as  they  kept  the  cove- 
nant of  cltcumcifion,  is  not  fo  true  ;  as  is  clear  from 
Gen.  xvii.  9,  10.  "  And  God  faid  unto  Abraham, 
Thou  fhait  keep  my  covenant  therefore,  thou,  and  thy 
feed  after  thee,  in  their  generations.  This  is  my  cove- 
nant, which  ye  fhall  keep  between  me  and  you,  and  thy 
feed  after  thee  ;  Every  man  child  among  you  fhall  J>e 
circumcifed.,  From  this  teftimony  it  is  plain  that  cir- 
cumcision preferved  their  (landing  in  the  Jewifh  church, 
and  the  want  of  it  cut  them  off  from  it,  as  may  be  hen 
from  the  14th  verfe.  «  And  the  uncircumcifed  man 
child,  whofe  flefh  of  his  forefkin  is  not  circumcifed,  that 
fou!  fhall  be  cut  off  from  his  people  ;  he  hath  broken  my 
covenant.'  From  thefe  fcriptures,  it  is  reduced  to  a 
certainty,  that  holinefs  of  heart  being  wanting,  was  rot 
a.  matter  of  difcipline  in  the  Jewifh  church  s    though  it 


20 

l>e  required  juftly  of  all  God's  creatures.  And  hence 
the  complaints  of  God  againft  them,  and  the  judgments 
of  God  upon  them  for  their  wickednefs,  was  not  confi- 
ned to  the  nation  of  the  Jews,  but  extended  to  the  na- 
tions of  the  earth  in  general,  at  times  and  feafons.  It 
is  true  that  the  condemnation  of  the  Jews  was  greatly 
augmented*  on  the  account  of  the  great  bleffing  God 
conferred  on  them,  which  made  their  conduct  the  more 
full  of  ingratitude,  for  where  much  is  given,  much  is  re- 
quired. 

In  the  26th  page,  you  afk,  «  If  faith  had  not  been  re- 
quired of  the  Jews  by  God,  as  a  term  of  their  church 
membcrfhip,  why  were  fo  many  of  them  cut  off  for  their 
unbelief?"    In  anfwer  to  this,  I  would  afk,  when  were 
the  Jews  cut  off  for  their  unbelief  ?  Should  this  queition 
have  a  iuitable   anfwer,    it  will  expofe  the   iniquity  of 
your  arguments,  in  trying  to  prove  that  the  Jewifh  and 
Gentile  church  were  both  one.     And  if  we  are  careful 
to  pay  attention  to  the  facred  word  of  God.  the  decifion 
will  be,  firft,  that  they  were  cut  eff  at  the  time  Chrift, 
his  forerunner,  and    the  apoftles  came,    fecondly,    the 
reafons  they  were  cut  off,  were,  that  God  was  now  about 
to  fet  up  a  gofpel  church  confiding  only  of  true  believ- 
ers, of  which  the  unbelieving  Jews  were  not  fit  iubjecls ; 
and  thirdly,   the  time  God  had  appointed   to  reject  the 
nation  of  the  Jews  had  come.     Which  afTertion,  if  pro- 
ved to  be  true,  will  at  once  difprove  your  whole   argu- 
ments in  this  third  feclion,    to  wit,  that  the  Jewifn  and 
gofpel  church  are  both  one.     We  will  now  appeal  to  the 
word   and  teftimony  for  a  decifion     on   this   important 
queftion.     It  will  be  remembered,  that  the  point  in  de- 
bate, is,  whether  at  the  coming  of  Jefus  Chrift  and  the 
apoftles,  that  the  Jewifn  church  were  rejected,  and  the 
gofpel  church  fet  up  ?  or  whether  Jefus  Chrift,  his  fore- 
runner, and  the  apoftles  were  received   into  the  Jewifii 
church  ?    Let  us  iiften  firft  to  Chrift's  forerunner,   and 
fee  what  his  witnefs  will  be.       Matthew  iii.  1,2.    «  I'n 
thofe  days  came  John  the  Baptift  preaching  in  the  wil- 


21 

derncf6  of  Judea,  and  faying,  repent  ye  :  for  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  is  at  hand.'  Here  let  it  be  remembered* 
that  a  kingdom  is  made  up  of  three  erTeotial  conftitu- 
ent  parts  :  Firft,  a  king  ;  fecondly,  fubje£ts,  and  third- 
ly, a  law  by  which  thefe  fubje&s  are  governed.  With- 
out thefe  three  conftituent  parts  there  can  be  no  king- 
dom. Let  it  here  be  afked  if  this  king,  the  futjecls, 
and  law  or  regulations  had  ever  bzQn  the  fame;  where 
was  the  propriety  of  the  fervant  of  God's  crying  out, 
that  it  was  at  hand  ?  would  there  have  been  a  neceffity 
of  it,  efpecially  among  John's  hearers  ?  for  we  muft  bear 
in  mind,  that  it  was  at  Judea,  among  the  Jews,  who 
had  long  been  members  of  the  Jewifh  church,  and  well 
knew  who  the  fubjecU  were,  and  what  its  regulations 
were.  That  Jefus  Cnrifi  was  king,  and  will  eternally 
be  king,  is  a  glorious  truth  ;  and  that  while  he  reigns, 
through  heaven,  earth  and  hell,  and  governs  the  affairs 
of  the  univcrfe  ;  that  he  is  king,  efpecially  in  Zion,  is 
an  equal  truth  ;  but  that  the  fubje&s  comprifed  in  the 
Jewifh  church,  and  the  fubje£U  composing  the  gofpel 
church,  was  the  fame,  is  not  fo  true  ;  and  that  the  reg- 
ulations of  the  two  churches  were  the  fame,  is  equally 
as  far  from  truth.  If  the  fubjedts  were  the  fame,  how 
came  it  to  pafs  that  they  agreed  no  better  ?  and  what  is 
the  reafon  that  John  would  not  admit  the  fubjc£ts  of  the 
Jewifh  church  to  his  baptifm  I  It  is  evident  that  he 
would  nor,  only  fuch  as  gave  fatisfa&ory  evidence  of 
repentance  5  as  is  feen  from  Matthew  iii.  7,  8,  9/.  <  O 
generation  of  vipers  !  who  hath  warned  you  to  flee 
from  the  wrath  to  come  ?  Bring  foith,  therefore,  fruits 
meet  for  repentance  :  And  think  not  to  fay  within  your- 
felves,  we  have  Abraham  to  our  father  1  for  I  fay  unto 
you,  that  God  is  able  of  thefe  flones  to  raife  up  children 
unto  Abraham.'  Sir,  pkafe  to  inform  me,  why  John 
Itfed  fuch  treatment  to  the  Jews  ?  If  they  were  all  in 
a  church  together,  ought  not  the  members  of  the  fame 
church  to  equally  enjoy  the  privileges  of  fuch  church, 
while  they  remain  members  of  it  ?  In  page  28,  fe£Hon 
third,  you  alk,  «  Whether  it  is  not  unaccountable  thai 


22 


the  apofties  fhould,  in  the  fpace  of  a  few  Hays,  or  a  few 
hours  be  members  of  two  churches,  fundamentally  and 
efl'-ntially  different  from  each  other,  and  without  the 
thing  bang  mentioned  or  fo  much  as  intimated  ?" 

This  fuppofrion  needs  firft  proving  to  be  a  fatl,  in 
order  to  rendeF  it  as  myfterious  as  is  heie  intimated  ; 
but  while  there  is  not  the  colour  ef  evidence  offered  for 
its  fupport,  neither  can  be,  the  myftery  cf  it,  (though 
it  favors  that  ot  iniquity,)  is  eaGly  accounted  for.  The 
proper  nature  of  all  gofpel  myftery  is,  important  facts, 
whiah  are  glorious  truths  :  And  yet  in  there  own  nature 
infinitely  beyond  human  comprehenfion.  But  mere  af- 
ferrionb,  which  are  not  fa£fcs,  and  in  no  fenfe  true,  are 
eaftly  accounted  for,  by  proving  them  falfe.  But  to- 
mere  fully  account  for  your  unaccountable  fayings,  let 
ir  firft  be  obferved,  that  as  you  are  in  this  caie  the  af- 
fetter,  it  is  on  your  part  to  prove  your  aiTertion,  c*r  inti- 
mation, and  cannot  in  this  tribunal  be  admitted,  until 
fui.h  evidence  bfi  procured. 

But  I  will  go  further,  snd  condefcend  to  prove  the 
negative  fide  of  the  queftion  ;  that  is,  difprove  your  in^ 
timation,  that  the  apofties  were  ever  members  of  the 
Jewifh  church,  after  they  were  c®nverted  to  the  Chrif* 
tian  faith,  cannot  be  proved  from  the  word  of  God  ;  yet 
it  may  be  eafily  fhown  that  they  never  *#ere.  This  W 
think  is  feen  by  the  following  fcriptures.  Adis  ii.  41  J 
47.  «  Then  they  that  gladly  received  his  word  were  bap- 
tifed  :  and  the  fame  day  there  wer?  added  unto  them 
about  three  thoufand  fouls.  And  the  Lord  added  to  thtt 
church  daily  fuch  as  fhould  be  ia\-?.d.y  From  this  paf- 
fagc  it  is  evident  that  thefe  people,  whether  Jews  cr 
Gentiles,  were  now  received  into  a  church  that  they 
were  never  members  cf  before.  And  if  it  can  be  pro- 
ved that  any  part  of  this  number  were  Jews,  who  prior 
to  their  conversion,  had  been  members  of  the  Jewifh 
church,  it  will  be  reduced  to  a  certainty  that  the  Jewifh 
and  gofpel  church  were  net' both  one.      We  will  now] 


2J 

bring  this  matter  to  the  ted,  by  the  witnefs  of  divine 
truth  ;  and  fce  whether  any  of  the  converts  fpoken  of 
in  the  text,  were  Jews  or  not.  The  preceding  part  of 
the  fame  chapter  will  decide  the  point.  «  And  there 
were  dwelling  at  Jerufalem,  JEWS,  devout  men,  out 
of  every  nation  under  heaven.  Now  when  this  was 
nciied  abroad,  the  multitude  came  together,  and  were 
confounded,  beeaufe  that  every  man  heard  them  fpeakin 
his  own  language.  And  they  were  all  amazed  and 
marvelled,  faying  one  to  another,  behold,  are  not  all  thefe 
that  (peak  Galileans  ?  And  how  hear  we  every  man  in 
our  own  tongue*  wherein  we  were  born  ?  Parthians, 
and  Medes,  and  Elamites,  and  the  dwellers  in  Mefopo- 
tamia,  and  in  Jud^a,  and  CappaHocia,  in  Pontus,  and 
Afia,  Phrygia,  and  Pamphylia,  in  Egypt,  and  in  the  parts 
of  Lybia,  about  Cy\ene,  and  (tranters  of  Rome,  JEWS 
and  proftlytes,  Cretes,  and  Arabians,  we  do  h^ar  them 
fpeak  in  our  tongues  the  wonderful  works  of  God.7 — 
And  in  the  22cl  verfe  is  the  fame  intimation  again—-*  Ye 
men  cf  Ifrael  ;'  the  people  to  whom,  the  apoftle  was 
preaching  :  <  And  they  that  gladly  wceived  his  word 
were  baprifod,  and  the  Lord  added  unto  the  church  dai- 
ly of  fuch  as  mould  be  fived.'  Not  to  the  Jewifh  church, 
for  they  had  long  been  members  of  that  before,  but  to 
the  gofpel  church,  which  is  decifively  proved  from  the 
above  fcriptures.  In  page  2o*h,  fe£Uon  third,  you  afk, 
f1  At  what  time  did  they  ori^aize  themfclves  ioto  a  new 
church  ?"  With  divine  afliftance,  I  will  endeavor  to 
give  you  a  candid  and  fciiptural  anfwer.  Matthew  hi, 
I.  *  In  thofe  days  came  John  the  B.iptift  preaching  in 
the  wiidernefs  of  Judea.'  The  days  her-",  mentioned 
wre  nearly  eighteen  hundred  years  ago :  And  from 
this  time  di-i  this  gofpei  church  begin  to  arife.  With 
this  faying,  does  the  Evangelift  Mark  agree  *,  chapter  i. 
fori  the  xft  to  ihe  5th  verfe.  «  The  beginning  of  the 
pel  o(  Jefus  Christ  the  Son  of  God.  As  it  is  writ- 
ten in  the  prophets,  Behold,  I  i:nd  my  mciTjnger  before 
thy  face,  which  (hall  prepare  thy  w^y  before  thee.  The 
voice  of  one    crying  ia  -ihe  vviilemcU,  Prepare  ye  the 


24 

way  of  the  Lord,  make  his  paths  ftraight.  John  did  bap- 
tife  in  the  wildernefs,  and  preach  the  baptifm  of  repent- 
ance, for  the  remiflion  of  fins.' 

This  point  will  appear  (till  more  plain,  from  two  con- 
siderations, if  proved  from  the  bible.  The  firft  is,  the 
rejection  of  the  Jewifh  church  :  the  fecond  is,  the  fet- 
ting  up  or  building  the  gofpel  church.  Which  two 
points,  if  eftablifhed  by  the  truth,  your  queftion  will  be 
fully  and  fairly  anfwered.  That  the  Jewifh  church  be- 
gan to  be  rejected  at  the  coming  of  Chrift,  appears  from 
the  following  fcripturt s.  Matthew  xxi.  42,  43.  ■  Jefua 
faith  unto  them,  Did  you  never  tend  in  the  fcripture, 
The  (lone  which  the  builders  rejected,  the  fame  is  be- 
come the  head  of  the  corner  :  This  is  the  Lord's  doing, 
and  is  marvellous  in  our  cye3  ?  Tflercfore  fay  I  unto 
you,  The  kingdom  of  God  f Hall  bejaken  from  you,  and 
given  to  a  nation  bringing  forth  the  fruits  thereof.'  And 
Matthew  v.  20.  «  For  I  fay  unto  you,  that  except  your 
righteoufnefs  (hall  exceed  the  righteoufnefs  of  the 
fcribes  and  pharifes,  ye  (hall  in  no  cafe  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.'  It  is  here  to  be  remembered,  that 
the  fcribes  and  pharifeea  fat  in  Mofes'  feat,  and  held  a 
leading  part  in  the  Jewifh  church  ;  yet  our  Lord  reject- 
ed them,  and  from  the  earlieft  period  of  his  appearance 
on  earth,  thtre  was  the  grcateft  enmity  pofTcfled  by  the 
Jews  againft  the  MefTuh.  John  i.  ir,  12.  'lie  came 
unto  his  own,  and  his  own  received  him  nor.  But  ag 
many  as  received  him,  to  them  gave  he  power  to  become 
the  fons  of  God.'  If,  Sir,  the  point  you  contend  for 
be  true,  that  is,  that  Jefus  Chrift,  ihe  Apotlles  and  Jews, 
were  all  members  of  the  fame  church,  how  came  they  fo 
awful'y  to  cenfure  and  Condemn  each  other  ?  Would 
they  not  be  chargeable  with  keeping  the  moft  corrupt 
Order,  and  the  want  of  difciplinc  ?  *  Jcfus  Chrift  faith 
to  the  Jew*,  Ye  are  of  your  father  the  devil,  and  the 
luftsof  your  father  ye  will  do.'  John  viii.  44.  <  Theft 
anfwered  the  Jewi  and  faid  unto  him,  Say  we  not  well 
that  thou  art  a  ^umaritan,  and  halt  a  devil  V  vcrfc  43. 


25 

Thefe,  Sir,  were  the  very  members  of  the  jewifli 
church,  and  Jcfus  Chrift  faith  himOlf  in  the  3 7 1 li  vtrfe, 
*  I  know  that  you  are  Abraham's  feed.'  be  pica  fed, 
Sir,  to  read  the  converfation  that  palled  between  Chrift 
and  the  Jews,  recorded  in  this  chapter,  and  let  candor 
decide,  whether  they  were  all  members  of  the  fame 
church,  or  not.  Indeed,  the  word  of  God  contains  fuch 
repented  accounts  of  the  contention  between  Jcfus 
Chrift  and  the  Jews,  that  I  need  not  multiply  quotations 
here  ;  nevcrthelefs  I  would  ad  1  one  thing  more.  If 
Jcfus  Chrilt,  the  apoitles  and  Jews  comprifed  one 
church,  how  came  the  Jews  to  be  fo  exceedingly  afraid 
that  Jcfus  Chrift  would  deftroy  their  Church  privilc 
Say  they,  if  we  let  him  thus  alone  bll  men  will  believe 
on  him  5  and  the  Romans  will  come  and  take  away 
both  our  place  and  nation.  Moreover,  that  the  gofpd 
church  was  fet  up,  while  the  Jewifii  church  was  reject- 
ed, is  an  equal  truth.  The  manner  of  this  kingdom  be- 
ing fet  up  is  alfo  defcribed  in  the  word  of  God.  Some 
of  the  fubje£ts  of  this  gofpel  church  were  gathered  by 
John's  miniftry,  and  fome  by  the  miniftry  of  Jcfus  Chrift 
and  the  apottles.  To  thtfe  feyirigQ  do  the  following 
icriptures  agree.  Matthew  iv.  18  —  2  2.  «  And  J>  fus 
walking  by  the  fea  of  Galilee,  faw  two  brethren,  Simon, 
called  Peter,  and  Andrew  his  brother,  calling  a  net  :::*;> 
the  fca  :  (for  they  were  fifhers  )  And  he  faith  unto 
them,  follow  me,  and  I  will  make  you  fillers  of  men* 
And  they  ftratghtway  left  their  nets,  and  followed  him. 
And  going  on  from  thence,  he  faw  other  tivo  brethren, 
James  the  ion  of  Zebedce,  and  John  his  brother,  in  a 
fhip  with  Zcbcdee  their  father,  mending  their  nett  i 
3nd  he  called  them.  And  they  immediately  left  the 
fhip  and  their  father,  and  followed  him.'  John  i.  35, 
36  37.  «  Again,  the  next  day  after,  John  ftoo<!,  an!  two 
o!  his  difciples;  and  looking  upon  J.fus  as  he  walked, 
he  fnith,  Brhold  the  Lamb  of  God.  And  the  two  difei- 
p!es  heard  him  fpeak,  and  they  followed  Jcfus.'  Mar. 
viii.  19,  ax,  2?.  And  2  certain  fcribe  came,  and  faid  un- 
to him,  M after,  I  will  follow  thee  whiihcrfoevcr  thou 
C 


2<> 

goeft.  Ant!  anoth? r  of  his  difciples  faid  onto  him,  Lord, 
iuffer  me  fir (t  to  go  and  bury  my  father.  But  Jefus 
faid  unto  him,  Follow  me,  and  let  the  dead  bury  ti-ir 
dead.'  Mat.  ix.  9.  And  as  Jefus  palled  forth  from 
thence,  he  favv  a  man,  named  Matthew,  fitting  at  the 
receipt  of  cuftcm  ;  and  he  faith  unto  birr,  Follow  me. 
And  he  arofe  and  followed  him.  Luke  v.  37,  38.  And 
after  thefe  things  he  went  forth,  zv.ti  faw  a  publican,  na- 
med Levi,  fitting  at  the  receipt  of  tuftom  :  And  he  faid 
unto  him,  Follow  me.  And  he  left  all,  rofe  up,  and  fol- 
lowed him.' 

Thefe  psfiages  of  truth  furnifh  us  with  an  account  of 
the  rife  of  the  gofpel  church  •,  and  not  io  much  as  the 
fatal  It  ft  intimation  concerning  the  natural  feed  of  Abra- 
ham; neither  the  leaft  account  of  their  infant  feed. — 
And  from  thefe  fe'riptures,  it  may  he  feen  when  they 
were  organized  into  a  gofpel  church  ;  to  wir,  in  the 
days  of  Jefus  Chrift  and  the  apoftles  :  Alfo,  how  it  was 
organized  ;  to  wit,  by  Jefus  Chrift  as  its  immediate 
builder,  and  chief  corner  (tone  :  And  of  what  this  glori- 
ous fuperftrutlure  confifted  ;  to  wit,  of  Jefus  Chrift  as 
King — his  followers  as  fubjecls,  and  his  word  as  the 
Jaw  by  which  thefe  fubjedts  were  to  be  governed  :  For 
it  was  his  to  command,  and  theirs  to  obey.  I  think, 
Sir,  I  have  followed  your  windings  and  turnings  as  far 
as  is  neceffary  under  this  feclion,  as  it  refpe&s  your 
premifes  laid  down.  I  fhall  in  fhort  notice  your  infer- 
ence, and  clofe  this  head. 

In  your  inference,  page  32^,  fecTion  third,  you  ftn'e, 
«(  If  Chrift  has  never  had  but  one  church  in  the  world, 
or  if  the  gentile  church,  is  the  jewifh  church  extended, 
then  infant  membership,  under  the  gofpel  difpeafation, 
is  firmly  eftablifhed." 

To  thefe  fayings,  I  have  two  things  to  reply:  The 
fxrft  is,  that  having  removed  your  premifes,  by  fairar^u- 
Agent,  and  the  word  of  God,  your  inference  can  be  of 


*7 

»o  ufe.  When  the  foundation  of  a  building  is  deftroy- 
cd,  the  whole  building  muft  neceiFdrily  fall.  I  think 
that  this,  was  our  Saviout's  opinion  concerning  the  houfe 
buih  on  the  fond.  Neverthelefs,  that  a  candid  public  may 
fee  that  your  fubjedl  h.is  been  fairly  anfVered,  I  \a  iil  add 
a  fecond  remark  i  that  is,  allowing  your  inference  above 
quoted,  and  your  observation  in  the  following  part  of 
the  fame  page,  in  which  you  fay,  that  *'  The  church 
which  rejects  ore  clafs  oi  members,  cannot  be  one  and 
the  fame  in  tfiVnce,  with  a  church  which  receives  fuch 
clafs  of  members."" 


By  this  observation,  with  the  tenor  of  your  argument?, 
you  make  your  principle  ftrangrly  to  clafh  with  your 
practice?  although  you  plead  fo  much  for  propriety 
a iid  confjfteiicy.  If  you  do  not  underftand  what  I  am 
here  fo  boldly  hinting,  1  will  (peak  more  plainly.  The 
fum  of  it  is,  if  yeu  plead  the  right  of  infant  church  mem- 
berfliip  under  the  gofpel,  from  its  right  under  the  law* 
and  the  onenefs  of  the  Jewifh  and  gofpel  church,  (as  is 
evident  you  do)  why  do  you  not  extend  it  the  fame  length, 
and  not  fall  fhort — not  only  receive  and  baptife  the 
children  of  believers,  but  the  flaves  and  fervants  of  be- 
li.vtrs  ?  For  nothing  is  more  plain,  than  that  Abraham 
was  commanded  to  circumcife  all  bought  with  his  mon- 
ey, as  much  as  his  own  children.  And  alio,  why  do 
you  fprinkie  your  female  children  ,  for  it  is  evident  that 
they  were  not  fubjects  of  circumcifion  ?  Are  you  not 
here  chargeable  with  inccnfiitcncy  in  your  own  plan  ? 

I  (hall  now  pafs  on  to  notice  your  fourth  fecaion,  the 
vt  of  which  is—"  Water  baptifm  in  the  name  of 
the  trinity,  a  fcal  of  the  fame  covenant,  as  circumcif- 
ion." To  thefe  fayings,  I  (hall  have  but  a  Few  things  to 
obferve  ;  having  previously  expofed  the  gre?.t<r  part  of 
the  arguments  contained  in  this  fecTion,  In  noticing 
your  fori-rroinp  ones.  I  would  however  make  a  few  re- 
marks. The  firfl  is,  that  the  covenant  of  which  cirenm- 
ciuon  was  the  fcal  or  token,  ceaftd  with  u-rcumcihoi; ; 


2S 

for  circurrsciiion  was  the  cne  part  of  the  covenant  itfelf, 
as  well  S3  the  feal.      And  hence  it  neceffarily  ceafed  with 
«ircurncifjon.       This  declaration  is  confirmed  beyond  a 
doubt,  from  Gen.  xvii.   9,    10,    n.  *  And  God  faid  un- 
to Abraham,   Thou   Gialt  keep  my  covenant    therefore, 
ihou,    and    thy   feed    after  thee,    in  their    generations. 
THIS  is  my  covenant  which  ye  fhall  keep   between  me 
and    you,   and   thy    feed   after   thee;  Eveiy  man  child 
among  you  (hill  be  circumcifed.     And  ye  fhali  circum- 
cife  the  flcfli  of  your  foiefkin  ;    and  it  fhall  be  a  token 
of  the  covenant  betwixt  me  and  you/     And  the  apoftle 
faith,  Rom.  iv.  1  J,  that  l  he  received  the  fign  of  circum- 
cision,  a  feal  of  the  righreoufnefs  of  the  faith  which  he 
had  yet  being  uncircumcifed.'     And  Stephen  faith,  Acls 
vii.  8.  *  And  he  gave  him  the  covenant  of  circumcifion.* 
Thefe  fcriptures  are  decided  witnefs,  that  the  covenant 
God  made  with  Abraham  was  the  covenant  of  circum- 
ci&ori.       It  was  declared  fo    at  the  time  it  was  made— . 
undetilcod  fo  by  the  apcllle  Stephen,  in  an  after  date. 
F»©m  which  it  is  reduced  to  a  certainty,  that  the  cove* 
pant  of  circumcifiou  ceafed  with  circumcifion.     More- 
over,  if  baptifm  is  a  feal  of  the  fame  covenant  that  cir- 
cumciHon  was,  why  is  it  not  ufed  in  the  fame  way,  and 
to  the  lame  fubjecTts  ?   Circumcifion  was  confined  to  the 
males,  why  do  you  baptife  your  females?   Circumcifion 
wa*  extended  to  all  the   males    bought  with  Abrahom*8 
money  1   why   do   you  not  bap'.ife  your  male  (laves  ?     It 
is  utterly  in  vain  to  plead  the  Hmilarify  of  any  two  cafes, 
where  there  is  fuch  difiiinilarity.      And    it  is  equally  as 
vain  to  plead  confiften-  y  and  propri  ty,    where  there  is 
lucli  inconfilK-ncy  and  impropriety       In  |he  34th  page, 
you  fay,  ««  H-?  is  calkd  i  the  father  of  them  that  believe, 
who  are  not  of  the  ( ireumr ifion  only,  but  who  alfo  walk 
in  the  (leps  ot  that  f.iith  of  our  f  ther  Abraham    which 
he  hid  being  uncircumcifed.'       If  now,   Relievers  walk 
in  the  ftrps   of    Abraham^    they  will  not  omir  .he  ufage 
of  the  feal  of  the  covenant  made  with  Abraham,  for  oth» 
erwife  they  will  not  walk  in  his  ilepsJ* 


29 

The  firft  part  of  this  quotation  appears  in  part,  to  h$ 
a  quotation  from  Romans  iv.  l  i,  12,  though  not  quoted 
as  it  (lands  in  the  bible.  Wheihei  you  efigoed  to 
blend  fcripture  here,  aiffererit  from  what  it  (tan  s  in  the; 
word  of  God,  in  order  to  make  it  conform  to  your  plan, 
rather  than  conform  your  p'an  to  the  bible  j  and  wheth- 
er you  have  taken  a  part  and  left  a  part,  to  cut  it  fhort 
in  righteoufnefs,  I  fhall  leave  a  candid  public  to jadga 
for  themfelves  ;  and  proceed  to  afk,  is  your  inference 
drawn  from  it  jail  ?  that  is,  "  It  now  believers  wnk  in 
the  fteps  of  Abraham,  they  will  not  omit  the  ufage  of 
the  feal  of  the  covenant  nvade  with  Abraham." 

Let  it  here  be  remembered,  that  the  paff»j?e  reads,- 
**but  who  a'fo  walk  in  the  Oeps  of  that  FAITH  of  our 
father  Abraham,  which  he  had  yet  being  uncircurnci- 
(c6.'  Rom.  iv.  ii.  I  wr.uld  here  note  the  difference 
between  walking  in  the  fteps  of  Abraham,  as  you  inti- 
mate ;  arid  walking  in  the  ftr-ps  of  the  faith  of  Abra- 
ham. It  you  mean  to  import  from  connt&in^  them  as 
you  have,  that  they  are  fyoonymous,  I -would  here  ifk, 
bow  it  was  poffraie  for  A  or,,  ham  to  walk  t»  the  fteps  of 
bis  own  faith  ?  for  it  was  the  faith  that  Abraham  had 
being  yet  uncircumi  ifed.  And  if  helijr.ve.rs  car  not  walk 
in  the  fteps  of  that  faith,  without  the  fcfage  of  the 
feal  of  ihe  covenant  made  with  Abraham,  how  ccuid 
Abraham  walk  in  the  fteps  of  that  faith  being  -yet  uncir- 
cumcifed  ?  Do  the  fcriptures  give  us  no  better  informa- 
tion concerning  the  fteps  of  the  faith  of  Abraham  ?  Let 
us  lift  en  once  more  to  its  tnfpired  voice.  Rom.  iv.  3,  10. 
«  For  what  faith  the  fcripturts  ?  Abraham  belie vea  God 
and  it  was  counted  unto  him  for  righteoufaefs.  How  was? 
it  then  reckoned  ?  when  he  was  in  circumcifion,  or  in 
uncircomcifion  ?  not  in  circumcifion,  but  in  uncircuflv*" 
cifiori.*  We  may  trace  the  foof fteps  of  this  fafth  again. 
Heb.  \i.  17,  18,  !-;.  *  By  faith  Abraham,  when  he  was 
nice',  offered  up  If-iac  :  and  he  that  had  received  tbfc 
pfomife?,  pile  red  up  his  only  begotten  fon  ;  of  whom  it- 
was-  faii,  that  in  Ifaac  (bail  thy  feed  be  called  :   Aocouki- 

G    2 


3« 

Jng  that  God  was  able  to  raife  him  up,  even  from  the 
dea;(  j  from  whence  alio*  he  received  him  in  a  figure.*' 
Thefe  paflfages  inform  us  where  the  fteps  of  this  faith 
led  to  ;  from  which  it  is  feen,  inftead  of  inclining  A- 
braham  to  fprinkle  infants,  and  call  it  baptifm,  it  led 
him  to  go  forth  at  the  command  of  the  Lord,  to  offer  up 
his  fon.  And  then  will  the  fame  faith  rn  this  day  lead 
to  a£la  of  true  obedience,  in  obeying  the  command  of 
the  Lord,  rather  than  follow  the  tradition  of  men.  In 
the  fame  34fh  page,  you  afTert,  "  The  (irft  gofpel  bap« 
tifm  was  adminiftered,  on  the  day  cf  Pentecoft,  to  three 
thoufand  Jews,  who  were  converted  by  the  means  of 
Peter." 

Is  this  a  truth  ?  If  it  is,  I  would  afk  the  few  follow- 
ing queftions. —  i  ft.  « The  bapt'rfm  of  John  ;  was  it  from 
heaven,  or  of  men  ?'  2dly.  If  of  men,  why  was  our  Sa. 
viour  baptifed  of  him  ?  3d!y.  Why  the  Holy  Ghoft 
descended  in  bodily  fhspe  like  a  dove,  arad  light  upon 
him  V  4thly.  Why  the  8  voice  from  heaverr,  faying,  this 
is  my  beloved  Son,  hear  ye  him  V  5thly.  By  what  au« 
thority,  or  with  what  propriety  could  they  (the  apcftles) 
baptiie  them,  being  not  baptifed  themfelves  ?  as  certain- 
ly they  were  nor,  if  the  three  thoufand  were  the  fir  ft. — 
In  the  35th  page,  you  ftite,  "  And  when  they  came  to 
confuit  Peter  refpecling  what  they  muft  do,  he  refers 
them  to  the  promife  and  its  privileges,  which  now,  as 
they  exhibit  the  faith  of  Abraham,  is  to  them  and  their 
children,  as  it  originally  was  to  this  eminent  patriarch 
and  his  feed."  And  in  the  following  part  of  the  fame 
page  :  «  Their  children  no  mere  than  formerly  are  to  be 
excluded — the  promife  is  to  you  and  your  children,  and 
to  believers  of  all  nations  and  thrir  children,  even  as  ma- 
ny us  the  Lord  our  God  (hall  call." 

Is  this  candid  reafonirig  :  C^n  it  be  viewed  as  fuch, 
by  any  candid  Chriftian  ?  The  plain  fnce  of  the  fcripture 
is,  *  The  promife  is  to  you ,  and  to  your  children,  arH  to 
all  that  are  cf<xr  rfft  even  as  many  as  the  Loid  our  God 


SF5 

Jhallcall?  Acb  ii.  39.  If  iheir  children  were  to  be  bap- 
tifed  on  the  faith  of  their  parents,  would  it  not  follow 
by  undeniable  confequence,  that  all  that  were  afar  off 
were  to  be  baptifed  by  the  faith  of  the  fame  people  ? — 
for  the  promife  was  as  much  to  all  that  were  alar  ofE, 
as  it  was  to  their  children.  For  it  is  evident  that  it  was 
equally  to  them,  their  children,  and  to  all  that  were  afar 
off,  and  the  extent  of  the  promife  was,  to  all  that  the 
Lard  our  God  would  call ;  and  the  grand  reafon  why 
it  was  to  any  of  them  is,  that  they  were  ef7:6tualiy  call- 
ed, and  that  according  to  his  purpofe  j  for  furely  there 
are  no  promifes  to  the  unbelieving  in  the  pages  of  di- 
vine truth  :  And  hence  the  complaint  from  God,  in  E- 
zekiel's  day  againft  falfe  teachers  was,  *  Becaufe  with 
lies  ye  have  made  the  heart  of  the  righteous  yW,  whom 
I  have  not  made  Fad  ;  and  firengthened  the  hands  of  the 
wicked,  that  he  fliould  not  return  from  his  wicked 
wayi  by  promising  him  life.'  Ezek.  xiiL  22.  So  in  the 
gofpel  day,  falfe  teaehers  and  the  traditions  of  men,. 
caft  a  gloom  on  the  righteous,  and  caufe  a  depreffion  of 
foul  :  as  alfo  to  the  wicked  and  profane,  the  promife  of 
life  j  neither  of  which  has  God  commanded  of  his  gof- 
pel teachers.  Moreover,,  it  is  plain  that  thofe  baptifed, 
were  fach  as  gladly  received  the  word  ;  and  thofe  added 
to  the  church,  were  fueh  as  fhould  bt  faved  j  and  thofe 
to  whom  the  promifes  were  made,  wr re  thole  that  the 
Lord  our  God  would  call.  Should  all  thefe  truths  be 
overlooked,  and  the  argument  be  again  rt  fumed,  I  would 
aflc,  what  has  this  promife  to  do  with  bapiifm  ?  Is  bap- 
tifm  a  promife  ?  I  think  the  fcriptures  rtprefent  it  as  a 
command  ;  and  have  you  never  made  attainment  enough 
in  human  learning  to  know  the  difference  between 
promifes  and  commands  ?  I  conr-fs  that  I  am  no  gram- 
marian, but  believe  that  a  common  fehooj  bov  fix  years 
of  age,  could  perceive  the  difference  s  Fi.lt  promife 
him  a  new  coar  ;  then  command  him  to  go  to  work, 
and  next  give  him  his  choice  between  the  two,  you 
will  t'Atn  fee  if  he  is  not  a  derided  witnefs,  that  prom- 
ifes arid  commands  are  net  fynonymous  terms. —  Be  ad- 


•3-2 

vifed,  though  it  may  be  by  a  fool,  to  come  forth  on  the 
plan  of  the  goipel,  and  ceafc  reducing  fuch  eminent 
talents  to  fo  iow  an  ebb,  to  (hun  the  crofs  of  a  meek 
and  lowly  Saviour.  In  tne  39'. h  page  you  fay,  M  From 
the  expr<.iTion  ufcd,  it  is  certain,  that  the  covenant  dons 
away,  to  make  room  for  the  new  one,  was  not  the  cov- 
enant made  wi'h  Abraham,  but  the  ceremonial  law,  cr 
ceremonial  covenant."  I  muft  conitfs  that  you  are  pe- 
culiarly gifted,  in  the  couplative  application  of  the  word 
covenant.  In  one  of  your  foregoing  obfervations,  in  the 
16th  page,  and  1  ft  fe&.  you  fay  :  .*'  And  is  it  not  evident 
that  the  covenant  or  piomife  made  to  Abraham  ?"  &c. 

In  the  former  of  thefe  flatements,.the  word  covenant 
is  coupled  with  the  ceremonial  law,  and  in  the  latter 
with  the  promife  made  to  Abraham.  Is  the  nature  of 
law  and  promife  fo  nearly  the  fame  that  the  word  cov- 
enant, will  apply  and  fupply  the  place  of  tither  with  c- 
qual  eafe  and  propriety  ?  The  very  nature  of  a  law  is 
the  will  of  a  fuperior  over  an  inferior,  made  known  by 
expref*  command.  And  hence,  we  are  brought  to  the 
very  fame  tribunal,  that  we  were  before  ;  that  is,  to  com- 
pare promife  and  command,  and  if  the  cafe  was  righ- 
teoufly  decided  before,  there  mult  be  a  very  great  im- 
propriety in  either  the  former  or  latter,  cr  both  of  the 
above  flatements. 

I  (hall  notice  one  thing  more  in  this  feelion,  in  the 
43d  and  44th  pages,  iri  which  it  is  faid,  "  Had  Peter 
defigned  to  inform  them  that  they  muft  not  place  the 
feal  they  were  now  to  receive,  on  their  children,  he  nev- 
er would  have  told  them  that  the  promife  was  to  their 
children,  but  the  contrary  j  or  had  they  undetftood  him, 
that  their  children  were  nor  to  receive  the  feal,  as  for- 
rnecjy,it  is  prefumable  they  would,  at  lead  fome  of  them, 
have  objected,  at  fuch  an  abridgement  of  privilege. 

If  the  tencr  of  your  arguments  were  true,  there  might 
be  (obis  propriety  in  thefe  fayings  ♦,  but  to  make  it  m:re 


33 

fully  appear  that  they  are  not  true;  I  would  afk,  what 
privilege  is  obtained  by  infant  fprinkling  ?  Doth  it  con- 
vert the  infant  ?  this  perhaps  none  will  be  difpofed  io 
open-facedly  to  plead.  If  this  be  not  the  benefit  recei- 
ved, doth  it  become  any  temporal  benefit  ?  this  was,  a 
blefling  received  by  circurr.cifion,  for  they  were  to  have 
the  good  land  of  Canaan,  if  they  obeyed.  But  do  infanta 
by  fprinkling  in  this  day  receive  any  luch  advantage  ?  If 
not,  what  advantage  can  it  be  ?  Doth  it  pleafe  th^.m  ?  It 
certainly  doth  not;  for  it  frequently  makes  them  weep 
and  ftruggle,  in  which  they  (how  all  the  oppofition  they 
they  can  •,  in  which  cafe  they  would  refrain,  were  they 
not  forced!  to  comply.  And  hence  it  cannot  be  in  them 
a  free  will  offering  ;  neither  prefenting  iheir  bodies  a 
living  facriflce,  holy  and  acceptable  to  God.  For  this  can- 
not be  done,  u-nlefs  there  be  firft  a  willing  mind.  Again, 
are  they  more  likely  to  become  Chriftians,  in  a  future 
period  ?  This  doubtlefs  will  be  pleaded  as  the  privilege 
above  mentioned.  There  are  two  things  to  be  obferved 
here  5  the  firft  is,  If  there  is  no  fenpture  for  this  prac- 
tice, and  no  promifes  from  God  that  this  fhali  be  the 
cafe,  then  there  is  no  probability  of  it  :  the  fecond  is, 
if  there  are  any  promifes  of  good,  made  to  unconverted 
children,  they  muft  clafh  with  the  pifTiges  of  truth,  for 
the  fciipture  faith,  he  that  believeth  not  is  condemned 
already,  and  the  wrath  of  God  ahideth  on  him.  I  truft 
fufficjent  has  been  fa  id  on  this  fedtion.  I  fhall  fubmit 
I  ft,  to  your  conference  j  2d,  to  a  candid  public,  and  3d, 
to  God  the  Judge  of  all,  to  whom  you  anc  I  muft  give 
an  account  of  what  induced  us  to  v- rite,  an<;  what  we 
have  wrote.  I  &ali  now  not  ce  a  few  of  your  fayings, 
in  your  fifth  fedtion,  which  you  entitle,  «■  The  different 
imports  of  baptifm  coufidered.:> 

In  the  introductory  part  of  this  feCtion,  you  have  ob- 
ferved a  number  of  very  juft  fayings,  on  which  I  fhall 
here  make  no  comment  ;  as  it  is  my  prefent  defign  only 
to  notice  what  of  your  book  I  am  conftrained  to  count 
erroneous,  and  not  according  to  the  word  of  truth,     la- 


J4 

the  45th  page  you  cbferve,  "The  word  baptifm  has 
three  different  imports  in  the  New  Tc {lament.  In  ma- 
ny paffages  it  denotes  a  change  of  heart,  or  the  baptifm 
of  the  holy  fpirit  j  in  many  others  the  baptifm  of  water  •> 
and  in  a  few  it  is  ufed  to  denote  differing." 

I  woud  here  afk,    Is  the  baptifm   of  the  Holy  GhoQ. 

and  a  change  of  heart  both  one  ?  If  {oy  why  wers  the 
apofties  regenerated,  and  after  this  baptifed  wi  h  the 
Holy  Ghoft,  and  with  ilire,  on  the  day  of  Pentecoft  ? — 
For  it  is  a  proveabie  fa£l,  that  they  were,  unlefsour  Sa- 
Ticur  fent  forth  unconverted  men  to  preach  the  gofpel, 
and  work  miracles.  We  may  here  call  to  mind  Christ's 
faying  to  his  difciples,  Mat.  xix.  23.  *  Jefus  faith  un'.o 
them,  verily  I  fay  unto  yon,  that  ye  which  have  followed 
me  in  the  regeneration,  when  the  Son  of  man  (hall  fit  211 
the  throne  of  his  glory,  ye  alfo  (hall  fit  upon  twelve 
thrones,  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of  Ifracl/  From  this 
paffage,  with  many  other?,  it  is  plain,  that  the  apofties 
were  renewed  before  the  day  of  Pentecoft.  And  in  the 
2d  chapter  of  Acts,  we  are  informed  that  the  day  of 
Pentecoft  was  the  time  that  they  were  baptifed  with  the 
Holy  Ghoft.  From  which  ir  is  reduced  to  a  certainty, 
that  baptifm  of  the  Holy  Ghoft,  is  not  regeneration  \ 
unlefs  men  are  regenerated  mote  than  once.  From  ail 
which,  I  am  led  to  believe,  that  being  baptifed  with  the 
Holy  Ghoft,  was  an  endowment  from  on  high,  whereby 
thofe  who  had  been  previoufly  cor.veited,  were  now 
empowered  with  the  gift  of  working  miracles,  and  fpcrk- 
ing  with  tongues.  And  I  think  this  is  conformable  to 
what  is  faid  in  Acts  ii.  7,  8.  *  And  they  were  all  area- 
2"d,  and  marvelled,  faying  one  to  another,  Behold,  arc 
not  all  thefe  which  fpeak  Galileans  ?  And  how  hear  we 
every  man  in  our  own  tongue,  wherein  we  were  born  V 

In  the  fame  45th  page  you  fay,  H  It  is  with  baptifm 
as  with  circumcilion,  in  the  higheft  and  moft  important 
fenfe,  it  imports  a  change  or  hvart."  If  this  quotation 
be  juft,  I  would  afk,  if  your  explanation  of  the  apofllc's 


3$ 

faying  be  fair  and  candid  ?  It  is  contained  in  t\e  46th 
and  47th  pages  j  which  is  as  follows  :  The  Apodle Paul, 
in  the  following  paflages  has  refperct  wholly  to  the  in- 
ternal baptfm,  or  change  cf  heart  by  the  divine  fpirit. 
*  Know  jre  not,  that  fo  many  of  us,  as  were  baptifed  in- 
to Jcfus  Chrift,  were  baptiled  into  his  death,  i  here- 
fore  we  are  buried  with  him,  in  baptifm,  into  his  death  ; 
that  like  as  Chriit  was  raifed  from  the  dead  by  the  glory 
of  the  fither  j  even  fo  we  alfo  fhould  walk  in  newnefs 
of  life.'  Rom.  vi.  3,  4."  With  which  you  have  coupled 
the  apolbc's  faying,  Col.  ii.  11,  12 — which  is,  u  In 
whom  alfo  ye  are  circumcifed,  with  the  circumcifion 
made  without  hands,  in  putting  off  the  body  of  the  fins 
of  the  fl  th  by  the  circumcifion  of  Chrift  ;  buried  with 
him  in  bapufm,  whertin  alfo  you  are  rifen  with  him, 
through  tne  faith  of  the  operation  of  God."  With 
whuh  you  have  connected  his  fayings,  1  Cor.  xii.  13. 
Gil.  iii.  17.  Eph.  iv.  5.  and  1  Pet.  iii.  21.  At  the  clofe 
of  thefe  p.  fT^es,  you  have  aiTerted,  "  When  we  exam- 
ine thefe  paifages  in  their  feveral  connections,  we  fhall 
fine),  that  th-y  import  not  a  baptifm  by  water,  but  a  bap- 
tifm of  the  divine  Spirit  or  regeneration. " 

The  quotations  and  connections  of  thefe  fcrintures, 
and  your  comment  upon  them,  is  in  perfect  conformity 
with  your  treatife  in  general  ;  hrft  blending  fcripturc  as 
it  is  not  connected  in  the  bible,  and  then  drawing  one 
general  inference  from  the  whole.  That  fome  ot  thefe 
fcriptures  here  did  refer  to  a  change  of  hear?,  I  (hall  not 
deny  ;  but  that  all  did,  (hould  full  be  proved,  before  it 
be  afierted.  This,  Sir,  perhaps  you  would  make  your 
reader  believe  you  have  done  in  the  following  pau  of 
this  feci  ion  :  the  propriety  of  fuch  argument,  and  weight 
of  fuch  evidence,  (hall  now  be  examined  ;  which  evi- 
dence, if  deftroyer!,  by  fair  argnment  and  the  war  I 
God,  will  difprove  your  uiTertion,  ^nd  expofe  your  pre- 
fumprion.  The  firlt  of  the  above-quoted  scriptures,  en 
Which  you  comment,  is,  Rom  vi  3,  4.  «  Know  ye  nor, 
that  fo  many  of  us  as  were  baptifed  into  Jcfus  Chi  ill, 


36 

were  baptifed  into  his  death  ?  Therefore  we  are  bu- 
ried with  him  by  baptifm  into  his  death  j  that  like 
as  Chrift  was  raifed  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glo- 
ry of  the  Father,  even  fo  we  2lfo  (hould  walk  in 
newnefs  of  life.'  Immediately  after  this  quota  ion 
of  fcripture,  you  fay,  "  In  thefe  words  it  is  plain  the 
apoftle  has  no  refpe&to  water  baptifm."  page  48.  And 
to  make  yonr  reader  believe  you  proved  this  declaration, 
you  affert  again  in  page  49  — "  Now  you  will  notice, 
that  newnefs  of  life  is  mentioned  as  being  the  certain^ 
confequence  of  having  been  buried  with  Chrift  in  bap- 
tifm. And  what  kind  of  a  baptifm  mud  this  be  ?  not  a 
water  baptifm,  for  newnefs  of  life  is  not  its  certain  con- 
fequence. It  muft  therefore  be  a  fpirirual  baptifm,  be- 
caule  no  other  can  account  for  the  efTecX" 

Between  thefe  two  quotations,  you  have  placed  a  vari- 
ety of  fcriptures,  when  you  need  only  have  brought  two 
or  at  the  molt  ihree,  had  they  fpoke  to  the  point  in  de- 
bate ;  for  in  the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnefles,  (hall 
every  word  be  eflabiifhed  ;  and  hence  to  multiply  wit- 
nefs,  after  fufiidency  is  obtained,  is  vain  repetition, 
which  is  fpoke n  againlt  in  the  bible  ;  and  of  courfe  ought 
to  be  avoided.  But  fhculd  there  be  ten  thoufand  pafTages 
brought  up,  if  they  did  not  fpeak  to  the  cafe  in  debate,  it 
would  be  of  no  avail  ;  for  it  is  an  eafy  matter  to  flate  a 
po.nt,  then  quote  a  number  of  fcriptures,  and  fay  all 
thefe  prove  it  •,  and  perhaps  make  a  blind  multitude 
believe  it.  But  to  make  it  appear  that  thefe  fcriptures 
are  full  to  the  cafe  in  debate,  is  not  fo  eafy.  Should  a 
criminal  be  arraigned  at  the  bar,  accufed  of  murder,  and 
all  the  people  of  the  commonwealth  fummoned  as  \*it- 
neflls,  and  each  unite  in  the  outcry,  that  the  man  ought 
to  die,  but  none  of  them  teftify  that  they  were  eye-wi?- 
neffce  to  the  crime  of  which  he  was  accufed,  would  in 
this  cafe  the  crime  be  proved  againft  the  man  ?  Would 
not  the  Judge,  that  fhould  in  luch  cafe  give  fente«ce 
agaitift  him,  be  guilty  of  fhed^ing  innocent  blood  ?  I 
think,  Sir,   that  this  fzaiilitude  is  very  congenial  to  your 


37 

method  of  proving  things.  However,  that  the  public 
may  fee  that  this  is  not  an  unfair  argument,  I  will  notice 
another  faying  in  the  above  quotation,  whkh  is,  \*  Now 
you  will  notice,  that  newnefs  of  life  is  mentioned  a*s  be- 
ing the  certain  confequence  of  having  b-en  b-uiisd  with 
Chrift  in  bap'ifm,"  and  then  draw  your  inference* 
«'  And  what  kind  of  baptifm  mud  this  be  ?  no:  a  \\  iter 
baptifm,  for  newnefs  of  life  is  not  its  certain  Confe- 
quence. It  muft,  therefore,  be  the  fpiritual  baptii'm,  be- 
taufe  no  other  can  r.c count  fcr  the  e&lL" 

Sir,  I  muft  confefs  that  you  are  peculiarly  gifted  in 
dating  premifes  and  then  drawing  inferences.  Your 
inference  here  would  be  good,  it  your  premrfes  were 
truth.  Let  it  then  be  firft  tried  whether,  your  precnifea 
be  truth  in  this  cafe,  before  we  admit  ycui  inference. 
It  will  be  remembered,  th?t  the  premifes  now  to  be  tri- 
ed, is,  "  That  newnefs  of  life  io  mentioned  as  tye$0'g  the 
certain  confequence  of  being  buried  with  Chrift  in  b ^ p - 
lifm  "  £)oth  the  apoftlc  make  this  declararion,  or  is  ic 
i~olely  your  own  ?  Let  us  once  more  liften  to  his  iufptxeg 
voice  :  «  Even  Co  we  alfo  mould  wark  in  newnefs  of  life/ 
Sir,  was  your  faying  that  newnefs  of  life  is  rnenrionea 
as  being  the  certain  confluence  ;  and  the  ^poft  c'y  lay- 
ing that  we  fhou'd  walk  in  newnefs  of  life,  one  ami  tin. 
fame?  Let  candor  juJge,  and  truth  determine.  Lee 
not  us,  who  profefs  to  be  rrunifters  of  Chrift,  10  twin: 
the  word  of  God,  as  to  turn  common  fenfc  ai.d  gpod 
undcrftanding  out  of  doors,  in  ordet  to  fuppon  a  favor- 
ite fyiterm.  or  a  ptfpcffv  ffed  no  ioru  1  know  not  where 
your  authority  can  br,f0i  faying,  that  newnefs  of  life  is 
mentioned  as  being  the  ccmir  coi.feqien.  e  of  1  avinj 
been  buried  with  Cnriflin  baptifm,  fm  ftirely  lie  has  nor 
made  any  iuch  ftatement  or  inti  nation  ~,  but  i  ^  plyi-i:, 
that  as  baptifm  was  an  outward  fign  of  an  >  ward  woik- 
ang  of  regeneration,  i'  behov  us  to  live  as  becometli 
the  followers  of  Jefus  Chrift  ;  and  that  as  we  were  bu- 
ried in  the  water  in  bapmm,  an  4  then  raifed  up  again, 
it  was  figurative  of  Chria^  death  and  icfurtcaion.  acd 
D 


<38 

a  public  manifeftation,  that  we  are  interefted  in  the 
fame.  And  alfo,  that  we  are  dead  to  fin  by  the  body  of 
Chrift,  and  alive  to  God,  through  the  operation  of  his 
Holy  Spirit. 

In  the  fame  page,  you  have  quoted  the  apoftle's  fay*, 
ing,  in  the  following  verfe  of  the  fame  chapter,  which 
you  have  tried  to  explain  away  in  the  fame  manner  •,  but 
as  I  defign  to  notice  thefe  pafTages  hereafter,  I  (hall  for 
this  time  pafs  them  over.  I  would  here  note,  one  gene- 
ral obfervation,  with  regard  to  the  manner  that  you  have 
quoted  the  fcriptures  in  this  feeticn  j  that  is,  where  the 
apoftle  has  fpoken  in  fome  places  of  the  wafting  cf  re- 
generation, and  in  other  places  of  the  putting  on  of 
Chrift  by  a  vifible  piofcffion,  in  being  baptifed,  which 
is  the  vifible  badge  cf  religion,  you  have  coupled  them 
together  without  any  diftin&ion.  For  proof  of  this,  I 
(hall  give  another  example.  In  the  52d  page,  you  have 
quoted  another  paflage  of  truth,  which  is,  "  For  as  ma- 
ny of  vou  as  have  been  baptifed  into  Chrift,  have  put  on 
Chrift."  Immediately  after  this  quotation,  you  afk, 
"  What  are  we  to  underftand  by  putting  on  Chrift,  if  it 
be  not  a  receiving  him  by  faith  ?  We  are  commanded 
elfevvherc  to  put  on  the  Lord  Jefus  Chrift,  meaning  the 
fame  as  coming  unto  him  and  clofing  with  him  by  faith. 
From  this,  what  are  we  to  conclude  ?  W7by  that  bap- 
tifm  here  means  a  real  change  of  heart." 

If  this  quotation  has  not  a  plentiful  fhare  of  Armin- 
ianifm,  I  am  unacquainted  with  the  docHrine.  To  con- 
vince the  reader  that  it  haf,  I  would  here  afk,  if  being 
baptifed,  and  putting  on  Chrift,  in  thefe  paflUges,  means 
coming  to  him  and  receiving  him  by  faith,  in  the  work 
of  regeneration,  how  the  firmer  comes  to  Chrift  ?  The 
iciiptiires  reprefent  men  by  nature  dead  in  trefpafs,  and 
in  fin.  And  Chrift  faith,  that  no  man  can  come  to  him, 
except  the  father^raw  him.  And  the  wcrk  of  regene- 
ration is  held  forth  in  the  fcriptures  of  truth  as  the  work 
cf  the  Holy  Spirit,     Thereover,   I  think  the  apofiie  has 


39 

fairly  explained  what  putting  on  Chrift  in  the  (enfe  of 
thefe  pafiages  is,  in  Rom.  xiii.  12,  13,  14.  '  The  night 
is  far  fpent,  the  cay  is  at  hand:  Let  us  therefore  cafh 
off  the  works  of  darknefs,  and  let  us  put  on  the  ar- 
mour of  light.  Let  us  walk  honeftly  as  in  the  day  ;  not 
in  rioting  and  drunkennefs,  not  in  chambering  and  wan- 
tonnefs,  not  in  tlrife  and  envying,  but  put  ye  on  the 
Lord  Jefus  Chriii,  and  make  not  provifion  for  the  flefh, 
to  fulfil  the  lufts  thereof.'  From  this  teftimony,  it  is 
certain,  that  putting  on  Chrift  in  the  fenfe  above  deferi- 
bed  was  not  a  change  of  heart,  for  this  they  had  alrea- 
dy experienced  ;  but  an  external  putting  him  on,  by  a 
holy  conduct  and  converfation.  I  have  noticed  what  of 
your  arguments  I  defigned  to  at  this  time,  as  contained 
in  your  fifth  fection.  Your  inferences  in  53d,  54th  and 
55th  pages,  would  be  juft  and  fair,  were  the  prerr.ifrs 
from  which  they  are  drawn  true  ;  but  as  the  premifts 
from  which  they  are  drawn  are  a  compound  of  truth 
and  error,  fuch  are  your  inferences. 

I  fhall  now  proceed  to  notice  your  fixth  fe£ltcn, 
which  you  entitle,  "  Johns  Baptifm  corjldcred"  The 
tenor  of  your  arguments  in  this  fecVion  is,  to  prove  that 
John's  baptifm  and  minittry  were  bcth  under  the  law. 
This  point  you  have  labored  hard  to  maintain,  as  it  is 
of  material  confequence  in  your  plan.  However,  the 
weight  of  fuch  argument,  and  truth  of  fuch  ftatement 
fhall  now  be  examined.  In  page  $6,  you  fay,  "  If  it 
fltould  be  afked,  whether  John's  miniflry  and  baptifm 
were  under  the  Mofaic  or  gofpel  difpenfatron,  it  is 
thought  that  a  little  candid  attention  will  fettle  ther' 
point  to  entire  fatisfa&ion." 

Sir,  have  you  ufed  here  fo  much  as  a  little  candor,  in 
attending  to  this  fubjed  ?  If  fo,  I  could  wifh  the  Great 
Giver  of  every  good  thing  to  grant  me  understanding  to 
behold  it.  I  will  here  ielect  a  following  part  cf  the 
fame  page,  in  order  that  the  public  may  judge  of  the 
candor  that  guided  your  pen  in  this  fe&ioa  j  which  is, 


4* 

u  In  this  place,  you  will  be  pleafed  to  remember,  that 
the  old  aifpenf.stioT)  ended*  when  circumeificn  and  the 
patTover  ceafed  to  be  obligatory.,  and  that  the  new  dif- 
ration  commenced,  when  it  became  a  duty  for  God's 
people  to  receive  baptifm  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity, 
iitift  to  celebrate  the  Lord's  fupper."  And  in  a  follow- 
ing part  of  the  fame  page,  ««  The  day  of  Pentecoft  was 
rKe  poinl  of  time,  when  the  old  difpenfation  ended  and 
fhs  new  ore  commenced.  Knowing  therefore  the  cen- 
tre b-r/.'een  the  two  difpenfations,  we  may  certainly 
know,  that  John's  oaptifm  was  under  the  law.  During 
Cbriil's  whole  mmiftry,  which  fucceeded  that  of  John, 
eifeumcifion  and  the  paiTjver,  and  indeed  the  whole  cer- 
emonial ritual  were  in  full  force." 

£$  this  what  you  call  candor  £  If  fo,  I  would  make 
ioiv.r  further  enquiry.  Firft,  Where  and  when  did  John 
the  Baptift  practice  circumciuon  ?  Secondly,  When  did 
Jefos  ChriCl  and  his  apoflies  teach  their  adherents  the  ne- 
eeflity  of  bein£  circumcifed  ?  and  Thirdly,  IfJ-fus 
Chriifc  *nd  his  difcipies  paid  ftri&  attention  to  the  whole 
ceremonial  in {iit ?\t ion,  why  did  the  Pnarifees  fo  often 
?<ccufe  Tcfus  Cnriil  of  making  void  the  tradition-  of  the. 
fathers,  and  Chrifl  in  reply  tell  them,  thit  they  made 
void  the  law  of  God,  through  their  tradition  ;  which 
contrcyeriy  is  (o  repeatedly  recorded  in  the  New  Tefta- 
roent  ?  I  need  net  multiply  quotations  here.  Moreo- 
ver, that  John's  minidry  and  oaptifm,  and  the  miniflry, 
of  Jefus  Chrift.  was  all  under  the  law,  or  Mofaic  difpen« 
Cition,  would  admit  of  fome  query,  and  (houid  have  been 
p  Q*ed  before  ir  was  afierted.  Let  us  lilten  to  the  word 
of  God,  for  informal  ion  on  this  fubj"£t.  ;  which  is  the 
or.lv  Judge  that  can  decide  the  safe  now  before  us.  In 
wiiTcn  th~  followine  feriptures  are  decided  witutiTrs. — 
ifft-E  DSGINNIN.G OF  rHE  GOSPEL  OF  JESUS 
CHRIST,  THE  SON  QF  GOD.'  Mark  i.  i.  *  The 
law  and  the  prophets  were  until  John  :  foce  that  time 
jht-  kingdom  of  God  is  pr  ached,  a/id  ev-ry  man  pre  IT- 
exh  Uao  it.'  Luke  xvi.  16.  «  Now  when  John  hadhear^ 


4*" 

in  prifon  the  works  of  Chrift,  he  fen*-  two  of  his  rJifclples* 
And  faid  uuto  him,  Arr  thou  he  tnat  ihouhi  come,  or 
do  we  look  for  anothti  ?  J  fus  arifwercd  and  faid  ur:tr« 
them,  Go  and  fhew  John  again  thofe  things  which  ye: 
do  hear  and  fee  :  The  blind  receive  thrir  fight,  and  the 
lame  wak  ;  the  lepers  are  cleanfeci,  and  the  deaf  hear  ; 
the  deal  are  raifed  up,  and  the  poor  have  the  gofpe! 
preached  to  them.  And  bltflc'd  is  he,  whofoever  {ball  not 
be  ©fF  nd-ed  in  me.  And  as  they  departed,  Jefus  began 
to  fay  unto  the  multitudes  concerning  John,  Wnat  wet  C 
ye  out  into  the  wildernefs  to  fet  ?  A  rccd  Cn  iken  with 
the  wind  ?  But  what  went  ye  out  for  to  fee  ?  A 
man  clothed  in  foft  raiment  ?  Behold,  rhey  that  wear 
foft  clothing  are  in  king's  houfes.  Bur  what  went  ye 
out  for  to  fee  ?  A  prophet  t  yea,  I  fay  unto  you,  and 
more  than  a  prophet.'  Matthew  xi  2  —  9  *  And  }c(:.>^ 
went  about  all  Gallilee,  teaching  in  their  fynagogue?, 
and  preaching  the  gofpel  of  vhekingdom.'  Mat,  iv.  23. 
I  think,  Sir,  thefe  paffiges  tcaWi  us,  that  the  new  c'iI- 
penfation  commenced  at  the  coming  of  Chrift  2nd  hrs 
forerunner;  notwithtianriing,  that  fome  tnings  relating 
to  the  old  one,  did  not  wholly  ceafe,  until  the  GfUcIfTr- 
ion  of  our  Saviour.  And  by  proving  this  glorious  truth, 
have  dif proved  your  whole  arguments  in  this  ucTrion.—- • 
Notwithft'anding,  1  (hall  notice  a  few  things  more,  con- 
tained in  this  fe£tion. 

In  the  57th  p.ige,  you  (late,  «  After  Cbihl,  on  a  cer- 
tain creation,  had  healed  a  it  per,  he  commanded  him  m 
go  his  way  and  Chow  n'imfelf  to  the  prieft,  and  offer  the* 
gift  that  Mofes  commanded  lor  a  teJl'imony  unto  the  r. 
This  direction  from  Chiift,  proves,  .that  the  ceremonial 
law  was  in  fuH  force." 

Sir,  h  this  direction  from  Cbtii^,  fvfiicitnt  to  prov« 
that  the  whole  ceremonial  law  was  in  fail  force  ?  If  the 
whole  of  the  ceremonial  law  had  been  in  full  force,  u  it 
not  reafonable  to  fuppofe,  there  would  hwr  hern  fr  r- 
account  of  our  Sa*icut  and  John  the   Bapii'.t    c ••.}"■ 


4* 

focnfi^es  and  the  like  ?  Not  only  fo,  doth  not  this  fcrjp- 
ture  explain  itfclf  ?  This  direction  from  Chrift  was  for  a 
te llinriof  y  unto  them — unto  whom?  unto  the  Jews, 
who  were  ftill  tenacims  concerning  their  law  of  cere- 
monies. Somewhat  like  as  Chrift,  on  a  certain  cccaflon, 
directed  Peter  to  go  and  take  the  nfh  that  come  up  firft, 
and  rake  the  money  that  was  in  his  mouth,  and  give  for 
him  and  Peter.  Would  it  be  fair  and  honMi,  to  fay  in 
this  cafe,  that  this  proved  thut  paying  tribute  to  Csefarp 
wvis  a  go'pel  rtquiiition  ?  Would  it  not  be  equally  as 
fair  and  juft  as  the  cafe  above  referred  to  ?  In  tins  fame 
57th  pa^/r,  you  (late  two  things  mor**,  which  I  ftull  no- 
tice. The  firft  is,  <4  It  com  iuHvely  appears  from  anoth- 
er consideration,  that  John's  baptifm  was  not  the  gofpel 
baptii'm,  ftoce  he  fid  not  m?.ke  ufe  of  the  names  of  the 
'iiinity  in  the  adouniftiation*" 

This  y.°u  undertake  to  prove,  from  the  Holy  Ghoft 
being  not  yet  given,  ^fc  will  not  fay  that  he  did  baptife 
i  the  names  of  the  Trinity,  but  as  great  reafon  may  be 
offered  to  make  it  appear  probable  that  he  did,  as  you 
have  offeree!,  from  which  you  affert  that  he  did  not.  It  is 
true  that  the  Holy  Ghoft  was  not  yet  given,  in  the  manner 
that  it  was  in  the  day  of  Pentecoft  \  neither  was  it  gen- 
erally understood  by  that  appellation:  Notwithstanding, 
■we  are  informed,  holy  men  of  old  wrote  as  they  were 
moved  by  the  Holy  Ghoft ;  which  renders  it  pof- 
£ik;Je,  for  ought  that  v/e  can  determine,  that  John  rniiiht 
have  baprifed  in  the  names  of  the  Trinity,  though  ufi:)g 
a  different  phraf-ology.  But  fuppolV  that  he  did  not  ; 
does  this  coociufivcly  prove  that  his  baptifm  was  in  no 
refpecl  £ofptl  naptifm  ?  It  is  plain  from  the  bible,  thdt 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghoft  highly  approbated  it.  The 
Son  himfelf Jttbmiiiing  to  it  th  Holy  Ghoft  defending  in 
bodily  (hape,Hke  «  dove,anH  a  voice  from  the  adorable  Fa- 
ther, faying:,  5~£&  w  n>y  btloved  Son,  hear  ye  him.  Since 
the  adorable  Jehovah  nath  thus  owned  andappr  bvfed 
•he  bapufm  of  John,  I  know  no  juft  caufe  to  fport  at  it, 
or  tnSc  wiih  it :    This  is  a  dangerous  ground  for  con- 


43 

tempt  here.  Perhaps  the  reader  may  think  that  thefe 
favings  are  not  apropos  to  the  remarks  contained  in  your 
bo  >k.  1  will  here  fei  &  another  patTage,  and  leave  the 
Trader  to  judge  tor  himfelf  whether  hey  are  or  not  :— 
Which  is,  %t  And  here  I  obferve  that  John's  bzprifm  was 
peculiarly  his  own,  as  it  commenced  and  ended  with 
himfdf."  page  55. 

I  think  this  ia  going  one  ftep  further  than  the  ancient 
fcrioes  and  pharifees  dare  to  go;  for  when  our  Saviour 
afks  them  the  queftion,  <  The  baptifm  of  John  1  whence 
was  it  from  heaven,  or  of  men  ?  And  they  reafoned  with 
themfelves,  faying,  if  we  (hail  fay,  from  heaven  ;  he 
will  fay  unto  us,  why  did  ye  not  believe  on  him  ?  But 
if  we  (hall  fay,  of  men  ;  we  fear  the  peoph  :  for  all 
hold  John  as  a  prophtt :  And  they  anfwered  Jcfus,  and 
faitl,  we  can  ot  tell  '  Matt.  xxi.  25 —  27.  If  John's 
baptifm  was  peculiarly  his  own,  it  certainly  muft  have 
been  of  man  j  if  it  were  not  of  men,  (for  ]o^nt  iurely,. 
was  no  more  than  a  man,  and  fervant  of  the  Lord,)  con- 
sequently, had  the  pharifees  of  eld,  been  of  your  opin- 
fon,  that  it  was  peculiarly  his  own,  they  could  have 
had  no  other  thing  than  the  fear  of  the  people,  to  anfwer 
the  qucftion  at  large* 

The  next  thing  I  would  notice,  in  this  fe£Hon,  is,  your 
faying,  •«  befides,  we  have  a  peculiar  account  ot  lume, 
who  had  Keen  rhe  fubje&s  of  John's  baptifm, afterwards 
receiving  gofpel  bapiitm." 

You  here  refer  to  a  certain  circumftance,  recorded 
in  the  ic;*h  of  Acls,  whe.Te  Paul  held  converfation  with 
fome  of  John's  diiYiples  *  He  faid  unto  them,  Have 
ye  reccivrd  the  Holy  Ghoft  fmce  ye  believed  ?  And 
they  (aid  unto  him,  wr  have  not  fo  much  as  heard  »  he- 
ther  there  be  any  Holy  Gru  ft.  And  he  faid  unto  them, 
unto  what  then  were  ye  baptifed  ?  and  they  faid,  unto 
Ji  hn's  baprifm.  Then  fid  Paul,  John  verily  b^ptiled 
with    the.   baptifm   of  repentance,      faying    unto   the 


44 

people,  that  they  fhould  believe  on  him  which  fhouM 
come  after  him,  that  is,  on  Chnft  J  lug,  When 
they  heard  this,  they  were  baptifed  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord  Je^us/  'l'hat  this  was  jrofprl  baptifm.,  I 
imall  not  deny  ;  but  that  u  was  water  haptilm,  1  wV.Il 
not  admit  until  it  be  proved.  Had  you  coupltri  this 
tt  xt  with  thofe  under  the  other  fedftion,  as  the  baptilrn 
ot  the  Holy  Ghoft,  I  think,  you  would  have  come  much 
nigher  the  truth,  than  you  have  now  ;  a&  it  is  a  point 
clearly  intimated  in  the  very  next  yctfe.  *  And  wkn 
Ptul  had  laid  hij  hands  upon  them,  the  Holy  Ghi-ft 
come  on  them  }  and  they  fpake  with  tonpu<s  and  proph- 
eftf-d.'  Acts  xix.  6.  Another  thing  in  which  John's 
baptifm  doth  not  fuit  your  is  "  John's  baptifm  was  not 
the  feal  of  the  covenant  of  grace."  pape  58.  This  ar- 
gument I  fhall  not  try  to  confute,  for  i'  is  true,  and  the 
fame  may  be  laid  of  baptifm  mentioned  in  the  new  tcfta- 
menr.  In  the  fame  page,  you  affert,  <«  Nothing  was 
faid  by  John,  or  intimated  by  any  one  concerning  him, 
importing  that  his  difpenfation  was  defigneirt,  either  lefs 
or  more  to  effc£t  the  ordinances  or  modes  of  the  Jewifh 
wor(hig.wr 

I  will  here  feleft  a  few  p.;fT  ges  of  rivine  truths,  in 
crder  that  the  reader  may  iee  how  amiable  fuch  .  fl~  r- 
tions  appear,  when  compared  with  the  gofpd  of  J  'us 
Chnft.  «  But  when  he  faw  many  of  the  Pnarifets  and 
Sidducees  come  to  his  baptifm,  he  faid  unto  thrm,  O 
generation  of  vipers,  who  hath  wameil  you  to  flee  from 
the  wrath  to  come  ?  B»ing  forth  therefore  fruits  meet  lor 
Ttpemance:  And  think  not  to  fay  within  youiftlves, 
"We  have  Abraham  to  our  father:  for  I'fay  unto  you, 
That  God  is  able  of  thefe  Stoves  to  raife  up  children  un- 
to Abraham'  Matt.  iii.  7,  8,  9.  I  will  hert  juft  note, 
that  the  pharifees  were  Jews,  and  held  a  leading  pofl  in 
the  J.  wilh  church.  It  will  alfo  be  remembered,  thai 
John  h^re  imports,  that  God  wa3  able  of  ihefc  ftons-s, 
that  is,  of  thefe  Gentiles,  to  raife  up  chi?c!ren  unto  A- 
braham  *7   tgiteabJe  to  feint  Paul's  defcrrption  of  ABra- 


45 

ham's  feed.  c  And  if  ye  be  Chrift's,  then  are  ye  A6ra- 
ham'sfeedjand  heirs  according  to  thepron»ife.'  Gul.iii  29. 
In  your  60th  page,  you  affert  again,  "The  baptifm  of 
John  was  vaftly  important  in  its  feafon  j  but  to  argue 
that  it  was  the  gofpel  bdptifnv  becaufc  Chrift  fubmittsd 
to  it,  avails  nothing." 

May  God  forgive  you  this  fin  :  For  furely,  to  trifle 
thus  with  the  example  of  our  bleffed  Lord,  mufl  be  a  fin 
of  the  mod  aggravated  nature.  Read  the  heavenly 
mandate  of  our  Divine  Matter,  and  fee  whether  it  avails 
nothing.  «  He  that  loveth  father  or  mother  more  than 
me,  is  not  worrhy  of  me  'T  a-nd  he  that  loveth  fon  c? 
daughter  more  than  me,  is  not  worthy  of  me.  And  he 
that  taketh  not  his  crofs,  and  followeth  after  me,  is  not 
worthy  of  me.'  Matt.  x.  37,  38.  Has  our  Lord  com? 
into  this  world,  and  by  his  life,  fet  an  example  for  his 
followers,  and  commanded  them  exprefsly  to  follow 
him  ;  and  yet  his  being  baptifed  of  John  in  the  river 
Jordan  of  no  avail  ?  Did  he  at  any  time,  when  he  com* 
manded  his  difciples  to  follow  him,  make  this  exception^ 
that  they  muft  not  follow  him  in  the  ordinance  of  bap- 
tifm ?  If  not,  why  dare  you  to  make  it  ?  Did  nof  our 
Lord  underftand  what  he  faid,  3nd  what  he  was  doing, 
when  he  fet  the  example,  and  commanded  his  children 
to  follow  him  ?  Indeed,  is  there  any  one  inftance  record- 
ed in  all  the  word  of  God,  when  all  heaven  more  glo- 
rioufly  approbated  the  event,  than  when  our  glorious 
H-ad  was  immerfed  in  the  river  Jordan?  Ought  not 
every  heart  to  melt  in  the  deeprft  contrition,  while 
touched  with  a  fenfe  of  fuch  condefcenGon  ?  It  is  no 
wonder  that  the*  Ethiopian  eunuch  (hculd  eitc^m  it.as.a,. 
high  privilege,  to  follow  fuch  a  glqrious  Leader  as  this ;. 
and  to  imitate  fuch,  a  worthy  example.  Well  might 
the  fimermen  be  attracted  with  this  civine  p^rfon,  and 
the  numrrous  multitude  on  the  H.^y  of  Pentr-coff  go 
forth  At  the  bidding  of  faint  Peter,  to  follow  the  mttk 
and  lowly  Saviour  of  fimiers, 


4& 

As  much  as  this  venerable  inflltution  has  been  ridi- 
culed by  the  profane,  and  trifled  with  by  profefTors — 
ftill  the  Chief  Shepherd  has  ever  had  a  flock  delighing 
to  follow  his  footfteps.  And  was  there  one  flep  that 
our  dear  Redeemer  took  while  here  below  more  eafy  tor 
be  feen  than  in  the  ordinance  of  baptifm  ?  In  the  6  ift 
page,  you  further  obferve  :  "The  import  of  John's  bap- 
tifm in  its  application  to  our  Lord,  we  may  gather  from 
his  words — that  it  behoved  him  to  fulfil  all  righteouf- 
nefs :  What  righteoufnefs  now  mufi:  he  fulfil  ?  It  could 
be  no  other  than  ceremonial  righteoufnefs.  As  he  is 
now  to  be  clothed  with  the  office  of  High  Prieft,  he 
mull  be  regularly  inducted  into  his  work/' 

To  thefe  fayings,  I  have  two  things  to  obferve  :  The' 
fir  ft  is,  I  challenge  your  authority  for  faying,  that  it 
could  be  no  other  than  ceremonial  righteoufnefs,  that 
our  Lord  fulfilled  in  his  baptifm.  Indeed,  Sir,  it  is  ev- 
ident, that  his  being  baptifed  could  not  be  fulfilling  cer- 
emonial righteoufnefs,  fince  no  fuch  thing  as  baptifm 
was  even  fo  much  as  mentioned  in  the  whole  ceremo* 
nial  law.  In  order  further  to  confirm  the  point  that  this 
was  not  ceremonial  righteoufnefs,  let  it  here  be  afked, 
what  ceremonial  righteoufnefs  is  ?  If  we  pay  good  heed 
to  the  fcriptures  of  truth,  rft'ty  will  furtly  determine  this 
point.  Deut.  vi.  1,  Teads  thus  :  *  Now  thefe  are  the 
commandments,  the  ftatutes,  and  the  judgments,  which, 
the  Lord  ycur  God  commanded  to  teach  you,  that  ye 
might  do  them  in  the  land  whither  ye  go  to  pofTefs  it.' 
The  remaining  pan  of  this  chapter  is  taken  up  with  in- 
forming the  children  of  Krael  more  particularly,  what 
thefe  ftatutes  and  commands  are  ;  and  then  clofes  with 
thefe  words :  <  And  it  (hall  be  our  righteoufnef?,  if  we 
obferve  to  do  all  thefe  commandments  before  the  Lord 
our  God,  as  he  hath  commanded  us.'  From  thefe  paf- 
fages  of  truth,  we  are  taught  that  law  righteoufnefs  is 
doing  the  things  commanded  in  that  law  to  be  done. — 
And  hence  it  is,  that  the  apoftle  Paul,  (fpeaking  of  his 
former  experience  and  the  ftrift  attention  he  had  paid  to 


47 

the  cerimonial  law,)  faith  *  touching  the  righteoufnefs 
which  is  in  the  law,  blamelefs/  Phil.  Hi.  6.  If  this  in- 
formation  concerning  law  righteoufnefs  be  correct,  then 
it  is  reduced  to  a  certainty,  that  Chrift's  being  baptifed, 
could  not  be  fulfilling  ceremonial  righteoufnefs  ;  unlefs 
ibme  part  of  that  ceremony  actually  required  baptifm. 
And  as  it  is  certain,  that  there  was  no  fuch  thing  as 
baptifm  ever  required  in  any  part  of  the  ceremonial  law, 
nor  even  in  any  part  of  the  old  difpenfation,  it  is  equal- 
ly as  certain,  that  Chrift  being  baptifed  in  the  river  Jor«< 
dan,  was  not  fulfilling  the  righteoufnefs  of  any  one  cer- 
emony in  the  old  difpenfation  ;  and  of  courfe,  inftead 
of  this  folemn  tranfac~Uon  proving  that  the  baptifm  of 
John  was  under  the  old  difpenfation,  it  is  an  inconteft- 
ible  evidence  that  it  was  not.  The  fecond  thing  I  would 
remark,  is,  your  exertion  to  prove  that  this  was  ceremo- 
nial righteoufnefs,  that  it  was  to  give  him  a  regular  in- 
duction into  the  office  of  High-Prieft :  That  Jefu» 
Chrift  was  Prieft,  as  well  as  Prophet  and  King,  is  a  glo- 
rious truth  ;  but  that  he  ever  executed  the  Prielt's  office, 
as  thofe  priefts  under  the  law  did,  is  net  true.  The 
bufinefs  of  thofe  priefts  under  the  law,  was,  to  burn  in- 
cenfe,  and  effer  facrince  for  fin — firfl  for  themfelves,  and 
then  for  the  people  :  but  Jefus  Chrift  being  High- 
Prieft,  it  was  neceffary  that  he  mould  have  fomewhat  to 
offer  alfo  :  And  the  apcftle  tells  us  what  it  was,  that 
he  fhould  offer  himfelf  a  facrifice  without  fpot  to  God  ; 
and  that  he  hath  by  one  offering  forever  perfected  them 
that  were  fanclified,  no  account,  or  the  fmalleft  inti- 
mation in  the  New-Teftament,  that  he  ever  offered  any 
facrifices  until  he  offered  himfelf  once  for  all.  And  if 
he  was  made  a  Prieft  after  the  order  of  Mekhifedec,  and 
not  after  the  order  of  Aaron,  why  is  this  intimation  that 
he  muft  be  wafhed,  in  order  to  fit  him  for  the  prieft's 
ofike  ?  Ue,  as  God  was  eternally  fitted  for  his  office  and 
the  Godhead  prepared  for  him  a  boJy,  and  hence  he 
was  perfectly  fitted  without  coming  to  John,  or  any  of 
iris  creatures.  Another  unhappy  event  on  your  fide  of 
the  queflion,  is,  «  Fcr  it  is  evident  that  our  Lord  fprang 


4* 

but  of  Juda  ;  of  which  tribe  Mofes  fpake  nothing  con- 
cerning priefihood.  And  it  is  yet  far  more  evident :  for 
that  after  the  fimilitude  of  M^lchifedec  there  ariA-th 
another  prieft,  WHO  IS  MADE,  NOT  AFTER  THE 
LAW  OF  A  CARNAL  COMMANDMENT,  BUT 
AFTER  THE  POWER  OF  AN  ENDLESS  LIFE.1 
Heb,  vii.  14,  15,  16.  This  laft  paffagc  is  fo  full  to  the 
cafe  in  debate,  that  it  needs  no  comment  at  all.  Cor- 
refpendene  with  it,  doth  the  apoftle  teftify  again  :  «  But 
Chrift  being  coane  an  high  prieft  of  good  things  to 
come,  by  a  greater  and  more  perfect  tabernacle,  not 
made  with  hands,  that  is  to  fay,  of  this  building  ;  Nei- 
ther by  the  blood  of  goats  and  calves,  but  by  his  own 
blood  he  entered  in  once  into  the  holy  place,  having  ob- 
tained eternal  redrmption  for  Ub  :  For  if  the  blood  of 
bulls,  and  of  goats,  and  the  afhes  of  an  heifer  fprinkling 
the  unclean,  fanftifieth  to  the  purifying  of  the  flefh  ; 
how  much  more  fh ^11  the  blood  of  Chrift,  who  through 
the  eternal  fpirit,  offered  himfelf  without  fpot  to  God, 
purge  your  confeience  from  dead  works,  to  ferve  the 
living  God  ?  And  for  this  caufe  he  is  the  mediator  of 
the  new  teftament,  that  by  means  of  death,  for  the  re- 
demption of  the  tranfgrtflions  that  were  under  the  firfk 
teftament, they  which  are  called  might  receive  the  prom- 
lfe  of  eternal  inheritance.'  Heb.  ix.  ti — 15.  Are  wc 
not  taught  by  thefe  fcriptures,  with  the  whole  fcope  of 
divine  truth,  that  the  priefts,  facrifices,  and  altars,  on 
which  thole  facrifices  under  the  law  were  offered,  were 
ail  types  ;>nd  fhadows,  of  which  ChrifVs  was  the  glori- 
ous antitype  and  iubftance  ?  Jefus  Chrift,  in  his  prieftly 
office,  was  the  altar,  prieft  and  facrificc.  His  divine 
nature  was  the  altar,  on  which  his  humanity  was  ma^e 
an  offering  to  God  ;  typified  by  thofe  ahars  under  the 
law,  which  were  to  be  built,  nor  of  h^wn  (tone,  nor  of 
brkk  1,  which  is  again  implied,  Mat.  v.  23.  «  Therefore, 
if  thou  bring  thy  git  tc  the  al'ar.'  It  is  alfo  implied  in 
the  above  paiTage  ;  «  Who  through  the  Eternal  Spirit 
offered  himfelf  without  fpo»  to  God.'  But  is  more 
Clearly  explained,   in  Mat.  xxiii.  19.    ■  For  whether  is 


^9 

•greater,  the  gift,  or  the  altar  that  fan&ifieth  the  gift  f 
Importing,  that  though  it  was  impoffible  for  the  divine 
nature  to  fufFer,  yet  the  union  of  the  two  natures,  jud- 
]y  eflimated  the  fufTerings  and  made  an  atonement  for 
fin,  which  is  infinite,  and  perfectly  adequate  to  the  re- 
quifition  of  a  divine  law.  That  Chrid's  human  nature  was 
the  facrifice,  is  an  undoubted  truth  ;  and  that  both  fcul  &: 
body  were  made  an  offering,  is  equally  true.  See  Pf.  xvi. 
io.     'For  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  foul  in  hell ;  neither 
wilt  thou  fuffer    thy  holy  one  to  fee  corruption.*     And 
Matt.  xxvi.  .38.    «  Then  faith  he  unto  them,  My  foul  is 
exceeding  forrowful  even  unto  death.'     And  that  he  as 
pried  offered  up  himfelf  without  fpot  to  God,  hath  al- 
ready been  proved.     From  this  date  men?  it  appears  that 
Jefus  Chrid  was  the  glorious  antitype,  of   which  Thofe: 
altars,  prieds  and  facrifices  were  types.     If  To,  where  is 
the  propriety  hi  arguing  that  he  muft  have  the  fame  cer- 
emonial induction  into  his  office,  as  thofe  prieds  under 
the  law  had,  who  were  only  types  ?   If  Jefus  Chrift  had 
4>een  only  a  type,  then  it  would  have  been  neceffary  that 
he  fhould  have  had    a  typical  induction  into  his  office  ; 
but  as  he  was  the  .antitype,  the '-reality,  the  fubftance  of 
•the  types,    See,    it  behoved    him  to  have    an  antitypical 
induction   into  his  work ^    and  hence,     he  was  mace  ,i 
pried,  «  not  after  the  law  of    a    carnal  commandment, 
but  alter  the  power  of  an  endlefs  life.'       And  thus   wc 
fee,  his  reward  was  with  him,  and  his  work  before  him. 
In  the  62.1  page,  fpeaking  of  baptifm  as  adminift-red  by 
Ctirid's  ciifciples  before  his  death,  you  fay,  "  If  this  ha  i 
been  the  golpel  baptifm,  it  would  appear  unaccountable 
that  he  fhould  give  them  another  coratcorifupn. 

I  think,  Sir,  that  your  unaccountable  fayings,  are  very 
eafiiy  accounted  for.  Why  is  it  more  drange  cr  unac- 
countable that  he  fhould  give  them  renewed  and  enlar- 
ged directions,  concerning  baptifm,  than  that  he  fhould 
give  them  renewed  and  enlarged  dircdlions  concerning 
preaching  the  gofpil  ?  He  afluredly  Cent  them  forth 
fore  bis  death  ;  and  after  his  rcfurr :cTtiori  he  fent  them 


jo 

forth  again.  The  plain  import  of  both  cafes  was,  not 
immediately  and  wholly  a  new  commifiion,  but  a  re- 
newal, with  greater  power,  and  fome  alterations. 


part 
P- 


The  lafi:  thing  I  fnali  notice  in  this  fecYion,  is  a  pa: 
of  your  inference,  in  which  you  fay,  "  If  John's  bap 
tifm  and  the  gofpel  baptifm  are  fubftantially  different  in 
their  imports,  as  has  been  proved,  fo  that  we  feel  our- 
fel.ves  bound  by  exprefs  orders  from  Chrift,  not  to  fol- 
low his  example  ;  then  it  would  be  inconfifient  to  make 
his  mode  of  baptifm,  be  it  what  it  might,  efTcntial  to 
gofpel  baptifm,  without  exprefs  orders  from  the  fame 
authority/' 

The  firfl  thing  I  would  remark  here  is,  that  fince  your 
prcmifes  are  removed  by  fair  argument  and  the  word  of 
God,  your  inference  cannot  be  admitted.  The  fecond 
is  on  condition  your  premifes  were  truth,  would  your 
inference  be  fair  and  candid  ?  Would  it  be  truth,  fhould 
we  aflert,  that  the  difciples  of  our  Lord  not  being  fo 
fully  empowered  to  preach  and  caft  out  devils  before 
Chrifl's  death,  as  they  were  after  his  refurre£tion,  that 
they  did  not  preach  at  al),  neither  call  out  any  devils  ? 
Would  it  not  be  as  true  as  your  inference  in  this  fecYion  ? 
Thirdly,  you  note,  that  we  fhould  not  make  the  mode 
of  John's  baptifm  efTcntial  to  gofpel  baptifm,  without 
exprefs  orders.  Sir,  is  there  one  fingle  example  in  the 
word  of  God,  that  we  have  more  exprefs  orders  to  imi- 
tate, than  our  Lord's  being  baptifed  of  John  ?  Does  not 
every  parage  in  the  New  Teftament,  where  we  arc 
commanded  to  follow  Jefus  Chrift,  afford  exprefs  orders 
for  obferviog  the  mode  of  his  baptifm  ?  or  how  is  it 
pofiible  to  follow  Jcfus  Chrift,  and  not  go  where  he  has 
gone  ? 


prop  i 

is*,  "  By  fome   it  has  been  plead,   that  baptifm   in  (he 


name  of  the  Trinity,  though  performed  by  a  reputed 
proper  officer  in  the  Church  and  in  a  mod  fclemn  man- 
ner, is  no  baptifrn,  unlefiit  be  adminiftered  in  one  cer- 
tain mode. 

The  q  ueftion  here  is,  who  is  this  proper  officer  in  the 
church  ?  Not  an  unbaptized  perfon  *  he  cannot  be  a 
pronsr  officer.  Not  in  an  unbaptifed  church  •,  for  theu 
muft  he  be  partaker  of  other  men's  fins.  Should  it  thsn 
be  proved  that  one  mode  of  baptifrn  was  exclusively  the 
right  one,  your  obfervation  here  will  be  of  no  great 
weight.  In  the  64th  and  65.* h  pages,  you  aflerr,  (i  The 
mode  of  applying  water,  is  not  fo  much  as  once  men- 
tioned. Perfons  were  fometimc3  baptifed  on  the  brink 
of  rivers,  fometimes  in  houfes,  and  in  no  inftance  is  it 
mentioned  of  their  leaving  the  place  where  they  had 
been  worfhipping  and  going  to  tome  other,  to  be  bap- 
tifed."- 

If  you  ir tend' to  import  here,  that  perfons  were  bap- 
tifed in  the  water  near  the  fhore,  it  is  undoubtedly  ths 
truth  ;  but  if  you  mean  by  faying  on  the  brink  of  rivers, 
that  they  were  baptifed  on  the  fhores  cut  of  the  water, 
it  is  at  fuch  an  extenfive  diftance  from  the  truth,  that  it 
needs  no  expofing  ;-  for  I1  have  not  a  doubt  but  that  any 
enlightened  Chriitian,  who  reads  the  word  of  God>  can 
fee  the  difference  between  fuch  fayings  and  the  word  of 
righteoufnefs*  And  that  perfons  were  ever  baptifed  rq 
houfes,  cannot  be  proved  from  the  written  word  of  God ; 
for  no  fuch  (tatement  is  to  be  found  therein.  In  the 
fame  page,  to  fupport  your  plan,  you  have  ufed  the  fol- 
lowing obfervation  :  ««  But  though  in  Jerufalem,  water, 
even  for  common  ufe,  was  a  very  fcarcc  article,  being 
brought  from  a  diftance,  yet  here  did  this  vaft  multitude 
receive  the  {acred  feal."  This  faying  may  be  of  fome 
weight,  in  the  minds  of  thofe  that  are  wholly  ignorant 
of  both  bible  and  hiftory,  but  of  no  avail  in  the  minds  of 
thofe  who  are  acquainted  only  with  common  hiftory. 

The  hiftorical  account  in  Carey's  edition  of  the  bible. 


52- 

~ concerning  Judea,  Paleftine,  or  the  Holy  Land,  faith  : 
"  With  refpecl:  to  the  livers  of  the  country,  the  Jordan, 
called  by  the  Arabs  Sceriah,  is  not  only  the  molt  confid- 
erable,  but  next  to  the  Nile,  is  the  largeft,  either  in  the 
Levant  ot  in  Birbary.  It  has  its  fource  at  the  bottom 
<;f  Mount  Libanus  or  Lebanon,  and  is  formed  from  the 
waters  of  two  maun  tains,  which  are  about  a  mile  diftant 
from  each  other.  One  of  them  lieth  to  the  eaft,  and  is 
railed  Jor  ■•  the  other,  which  is  expofed  to  the  fouth,  is 
named  D$n.  The  confluence  of  the  two  flreams  is 
found  near  the  ancient  city  of  Cefarea  Philippi,  which 
is  at  prefect  only  a  village,  and  called  Bcline.  The  river 
t.a&es  a  courfe  between  the  E.  and  S.  and  after  running 
feven  mil?s,  runs  into  the  lake  Samachon,  or  Mathon,  at- 
pr^fent  called  Huletpanias,  about  frx  miles  in  length, 
rrom  north  to  fouth,  and  nearly  fcur  in  breadth,  from 
eafl  to  weft,  The  Jordan  ifTaes  from  this  hke,  and* 
tljws  through  a  great  plain,  pairing  under  a  tlone  bridge, 
called  J  icob'a  bridge,  confifting  of  three  arches,  well 
eondruclcd.  The  ri-vsr  then  continues  its  courfe  as  far 
as  the  like  of  Tiberias,  near  the  ancient  cities  of  Ghora- 
7.\'\  and  Capernaum,  where  it  mixes  with  its  waters. 
"When  it  iffues  from  this  lake,  which  h  about  eighteen 
iTiiles  in  length,  and  eight  in  breadth,  it  takes  the  name 
of  Jordan  major,  dividing  Pcra  from  Samaria,  the  plains 
of  the  Moabites  from  Judea,  and.  receiving  the  waters 
of  the  Dibon,  the  Jazer,  the  J^icob,  and  the  Gorith  ; 
after  being  augmented  by  Chef:  ftreams,  in  a  courfe  of 
CrStxy  five  miles  from  the  hke  of  Fiberias,  or  tea  of  Gal- 
lilee,  it  difcharges  i'tfelf  into  the  dead  fea.  The  Jo  dan, 
in  the  rainy  feafons,  overflows  its  banks,  to  the  tiiftance 
of  more  than  four  miles ;  and  on  the  account  of  the  un- 
cquality  of  the  ground,  forms  two  or  three  channels. — 
Its  current  is  extremely  rapid,  and  the  water  always 
muddy;  but  when  taken  from  the  Tiver  and  put  into 
any  kind  of  veffcl,  it  very  foon  clarifies,  and  is  fweet." 

From  this  hiftorical  account,    it  is  evident  that  this 
tiHfi  the  lakes  and  fraallc-r  dreams,  fuppliedtbe  cran* 


53 

try  round  about  Jerufalcm  with  water  fufficient  for  im* 
merfing.      To  this  hiftorical  account  I  would  add  one 
tefti'mony  of  divine   authority.       John  iii.    23.    *  And 
John  alfo  was  baptifing  in  Enon%  near  to  &alep>;  becaufe 
there  was  much  water  there*,    and  they  came  and  were 
baptifed.'     Ir  will  here  be  remembered,  that  a  former 
quotaiion  fays,   <«  and  in  no  inftance  is  it  mentioned  of 
their    leaving  the  place  where  they  had   been   worfriip- 
ping  and  going  to  fome  other,  to  be  baptifed."     This 
may  be  truly  faid  to  be  a  fuhtle  obftrvation  ;    as  there  is 
no  account  that  the  people  who  come  to  joint's  baptifm 
had  been  previoufly  worshipping   at  any  certain  place  : 
but  it  is  an  evident  certainty,  that  they  actually  went  to 
the  places  where  there  was  a  fupply  01  water,  when  they 
were  bapiifed.'     *  And  they  came,    and  were  baptifed. 
Then  went  out  unto  him  Jkrufalem,  and  all  ju  lea,  and 
all  the  region  round  a^out  Jordan,  and  wefre  baptied  of 
him  in  Jordait,  confefling  their  fins,'  Man.  iii.  5,  6.— 
From  thefe  fcriptures,  the  candid'  reader  can  judge  for 
himfelf,  whether  the  three  thoufand  or  any  others  were 
fpnnkled  for  want  of  water  \Qrmmsrfe\\\)  or  nor.    In  ins 
65th  page,  you  fay  again',  ««  Neither  is  the  word  in  the 
original,  the  EngHlh  of  which  is  to  baplif",  confined  to 
one  certain  mode  of  wetting. "     From  whence  is  this  rc» 
treat  to  the  original,  if  it  be  not  becaufe  you  have  efpou- 
fed  a  caufe  that  you  cannot  fupport  in  plain  E'JgUfh  ? 
Is  it  common  for  you  or  any  other  man  prcfeffing  divin- 
ity, to  make  fuch  a  reforr,   except,- in  cafes  where  you 
cannot  maintain  a  fair  argument,  and  hold  the  tradition 
of  men  without  ?    Sir,*   do  you  realize  what  contempt 
you  pour  upon  the  great  Head  of  the  church  by  fo  do- 
ing ?  Has  not  the  fame  infinite  God,  that  firft  infpired 
men  to  write,  ever  been  at  the  head  of  government  ? — 
And  has  he  preferved  the  word  of  lighreortfnefs,  againft 
all  the  afliulrs  of  earth  and  hell,  whilft  they  united  their 
force  to  deftroy  it  5    and  yet  fufFcred    thofe  hoiy    men, 
whom   he   raifed    up   for  the  exprefs  purpefe  of  tranf- 
latmg  ir,'   to  tranflate  fome   certain  parts  of  it   wrong  ? 


54 

it  be  in  the  minds  of  the  ignorant,  would  admit  of  fomer 
query.  I  fhall  here,  for  the  firft  time,  borrow  the  aid 
of  my  ietrned  brethren,  and  from  thence  (how  what  the 
n'ord,  the  Englifh  of  which  is  to  baptife,  is  in  the  ori- 
ginal. The  firft  v/itnefs  that  I  (hall  borrow  under  this 
head,  will  be  the  Rev.  Daniel  MeiriH,  of  the  Diftri£t 
of  Maine,  who  had  pradtifed  infant  fprinkiing  for  many 
years,  as  a  congregational  minifter,  until  the  year  1801  ; 
:it  which  time,  he,  his  wife,  and  eighty. three  of  hia 
brethren  came  out  from  that  denomination,  confefTed 
the  truth,  were  baptifed,  conflituted  into  a  chuTch  and 
the  Rev.  Daniel  Merrill  ordained  as  their  minifter  ;  in 
the  fellowfhip,  and  by  the  afliftance  of  the  Rev.  Doclor 
Bald  win  of  Bofton,  Pitman  of  Providence,  and  Will- 
iams of  Beverly.  For  further  information  on  this  fub- 
jecT,  I  would  refer  the  reader  to  the  4th  number  of  the 
7  ft  volume  of  the  MaiTachufetts  Baptitt  Miffionary  Mag- 
■  zine,  or  to  Mr.  Merrill's  Seven  Sermons  on  Baptifm. 
From  the  latter  of  which  I  have  taken  the  following  def- 
inition 0/  a  few  of  the  words  which  appertain  to  the 
ordinance  of  bsptifra. 

(t  1.  Baptifierkn,.  Greek  ;  bapti/ierium  and  lavacrum, 
Latin  •,  a  font,  a  bath,  a  wafhing  place,  a  vefTel  to  wafh 
rhe  body  in  ;  Englifh.  2.  Baptifma  and  baptifmos, 
Greek  ;  Baptifma  and  Bo/20,  alfo,  abluiie  faura,  Latin  ; 
hapnfm,  warning,  facred,  ceremonial  wafhing  ;  EngliPn. 
3.  Bapufles,  Greek  j  b'afhijl&i  Latin  ;  one  who  dips,  a 
haptitl  ;  Englifh.  4.  Baptizo,  Greek;  baptizo,  mergo9 
/avo.  Latin  ;  to  baptife,  to  dip  all  over,  to  wafh  ;  Eng- 
lifh. 5.  Lnuo,  Gr?  ek  ;  iavot  Latin  ;  to  wafh,  to  rinfe, 
to  bathe  *,   Englifh."  Sermon  I.  page  9. 

Si  I  am  now*  to  produce  evidence,  that  this  rs  a  juft 
and  accurate  definition  of  the  words. 

<{  The  evidence  which  I  hate  to  rffer,  in  order  to  fix 
precifcly  the  juft  fev.fc  and  meaning  of  the  words  baptifm 
;  r.d  to  baptifpy  is  contained  in  the  following  facts.  The 
1  ft,  cbmpVirts    what  the  Greek  Lexicon,   Concordance, 


55 

«  Schrevelius's  Lexicon  teftifies,  the  import  of  hap* 
tlfm  is  lotto,  wafhing.  Alfo  that  to  baptife  fignifies  to 
ivajh,  to  put  under  water,  or  under  any  other  liquid 
thing  ;  to  fink,  dip  in,  duck  or  plunge  over  head,  to  im- 
mcrfe. 

"  Butterworth's  Concordance  fays,  baptifm  is  an  or- 
dinance of  the  New  Tcftament,  instituted  by  Jefu3 
Chrift,  whereby  a  profe fled  believer  in  Chrift  is,  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghoft,  immerfed  in,  and  covered  with  water,  and  then 
raifed  up  out  of  it,  as  a  fign  of  his  fellowfhip  with 
Chrift  in  his  death,  burial  and  refurreftion  to  newnefs 
of  life  here,  and  to  eternal  life  hereafter.  The  fame 
Concordance  defines  the  word  to  baptife,  thus — to  dip", 
immerfe,  or  plunge. 

"  Entick's  Dictionary  fays,  that- — Baptifm  is  a  facra- 
ment  that  admits  into  the  church. — Bapttfer,  one  who 
chriftens,  or  dips. —  Baptif}eryy  the  place  of  baptifing  at, 
a  font. — Baptife,  to  chriften,  plunge  overwhelm. — Bap' 
Wed',  admitted  to  baptifm,  dipt,  &c."  Sermon  II.  p.  \g. 

This  cloud  of  teftimony  with  regard  to  the  original 
languages,  makes  it  appear  that  refortiag  to  the  original 
languages,  is  of  no  ufe  when  men  undertake  to  eftab- 
lim  a  fomething  which  the  word  of  God  will  not  fup- 
port.  In  the  fame  page,  you  have  quoted  the  apoftlers 
faying,  i  Cor.  x.  r,  2 — in  which  it  is  written  ;  <  More- 
over brethren,  I  would  not  that  yc  fhould  be  ignorant, 
how  that  all  our  fathers  were  under  the  cloud  and  all 
panned  through  the  fea  \  and  were  all  baptifed  unto  Mo- 
fes  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  fea/  "  The  wetting  in  this 
inftance,  could  not  have  been  more  than  a  niift  from 
the  cloud,  or  a  fpray  from  the  fea.  The  mode  in  this 
inftance,  was,  noqueftion,  fprinkling,  yet  it  was  a  prop- 
er baptifm." 

I  would  here  juft  note,  that  in  a  former  fe6Vion,  you 
tell  us,  that  the  lirft  gofpel  baptifm  was  administered  at 


S6 

proper  baptifm  when  our  fathers  parTed  through  the  fea. 
What  kind  of  reafoning  is  this?  That  ail  our  fathers  were 
fprinkled  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  fea.     I  think  that  in- 
flead  of    being   lprinkled,  they    were   completely  over- 
whelmed :  The  fea  being  like  walls  on  either  fide,  and 
the  cloud  coyering  them  •,  which  completely  makes  up 
the  import  of  the  word,  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  fea. — - 
Moreover,  the  apoftle  h*d  here  a  more  immediate  refer, 
ence  to  the  figure  of  baptifm,  than  to  baptifm  itfelf ;  as 
may  be  feen  by  the  following  part  of  the  fame  difcourfe. 
*  And  did   all   eat  the  fame  fpiritual  meat ;  and  did  all 
drink  the  fame  fpiritual  drir,k  :    (for  they  drank  of  that 
fpiritual  rock  that   followed  them}  ,  and  that  rock  was 
Cnrift/)     The  (puitual  m<?at   here  fpoken  of,  was   the 
quails    and  manna,    they  ate  in    the  wil.lein.fs;    which 
was  fpiritual  on  the  account  that  it  typified  the  bread  of 
life.     That  like  as  Mdfcs  fed  the  children  of  Ifrael  in 
the  wHclernefs,  fo  fhould  the  Son  of  man  feed  the  fpir- 
itual feed  ol  Abraham  with   the   bread  that  came  down 
from  heaven.     See  John  vi.    31,  32,  33;.  *  Our  fathers 
did  eat  manna  in  the  defert  ;    as  it  is  written,  he  gave 
them  bread  from  heaven  to  eat.     Then  Jefus  fa  id  unto 
them,  Verily,  verily,  !  fay  unto  yoa,  Motes  gave  you  not 
that  bread  from  heaven  ;   but  my  Father  giveth  you  the 
true  bread  from   heaven,;     For  the  bread  of  God  is  he 
which  cometh  down  from  heaven,  and  giveth  life  unto 
the  world.'     The  fpiritual  drink  that  they  drank  of,  was 
fpiritual,  on  the  account  of  its  being  typical  ot  the  water 
of  life  ;   whereof  if  a  man  diinks   he  (hall  never  die: — 
The  rock  that  followed  them  alfo,  was  not  Chrift  actu- 
ally, but  typically  :  That  like  as  Mofes  fmote  the  ro.k 
in  the  wildernefs,  from  which  the  water  gufhed  out  for 
the  thirfty  lfradites,  .and  followed   them  through    the 
wildernefs;   fo  when  the  fword  of  juftice  was  unfurled* 
and  fheathed  itfelf  in  our- Saviour's  blood,    the  water  of 
life  guflied  forth  for  the  fpirirual  Ifraelites,  and  follow- 
ed them  in  a  river   of  life,    through  3II  the  journey  of 

life,  until  it  lands  them  in  the  boundlefs  ocean  of  love> 
•  *.    dnA*<,  »:~w..  u„~j       th.«,i\,  ~- >„~*. f:,~,^,» 


5? 

by  the  following  fciiptures.  I  Cor.  x.  5.  <  But  with 
many  of  them  God  was  not  well  pleafed  *,  for  they  were 
overthrown  in  the  wiidernefs.'  Thefe  are  our  fathers,  or 
the  literal  Ifraelites  of  the  wiidernefs.  John  vi.  35.  '  And 
Jefus  faid  unto  them,  I  am  the  bread  of  life  :  he  that  com- 
eth  to  me,  (hall  never  hunger :  and  he  that  believeth  on 
me  fhail  never  thirft.'  Thus  we  fee,  that  with  many  of 
the  natural  feed  of  Abraham,  God  was  not  well  pleaf- 
ed :  And  though  they  efcaped  the  hand  of  Pharaoh, 
pailcd  the  Red  Sea  dry  ihod,  and  drank  of  the  rock,  typ- 
ically Chrift  ;  yet  many  of  them  were  fiain  in  the  wii- 
dernefs. Bui  they  Who  are  the  fpiritual  (ted  of  Abra- 
ham ;  who  partake  of  Chtift  already  ;  eat  his  uVfh  and 
drink  his  iA:'  O'i  ;  (hill  neither  hunger  or  thirft  ;  and 
hence  r^falts  the  neceiTity  of  keeping  a  feparating  and 
diftmsS<u'ihir>g  line,  between  the  children  of  the  bond 
an  and  the  children  of  the  free  woman.  In  the 
66th  page,  you  fey,  (fpe?kipg  of  John's  baptifm3j  that 
*'  He  b,  ptiied  in  Jordan,  arvd  in  the  wilderntfs,  and  in- 
dttri)  we  know  not,  in.  how  many  different  places,  tut 
as  to  the  mode  of  his  baptifm  it  is  left  uncertain- among 
the  non-cflentiais/* 

The  firft  thing  I  have  to  enquire,  is,  are  you  aware, 
Sir,  of  what  your  acknowledgement  in  the  ft- ft  part  of 
this  quotation  amounts  to,  in  thus  far  agreeing  with  the 
word  of  Godi  that  John  baptifed  IN  Jordan  ?  Should 
you,  Sir,  as  you  live  near  the  North  River,  fend  a  mef- 
ferger,  and  fetch  from  thence  a  little  water  in  a  bafen 
to  baptife  with  (rs  you- call  it)  would  a  byllandcr,  in  that 
cafe,  Teport  that  you  baptifed  in  the  North  River  ?— 
Should  he  do  ir,  would  he  tell  the  truth  r-  But  further  *, 
fhoulo  you  repair  to  the  river  fide,  and  take  from  thence 
a  little  water,  2nd  with  it  fprinklethe  fu'bje<St  of  baptifm, 
would  it  in  this  cafe  be  reported  tnat  you  baptifed  in  the 
North  River  ?  The  fecond  thing  I  would  enquire,  is, 
what  you  mean  by  faying  that  the  mode  of  baptifm  is 
ivot  eiTentiol  ?  To  re  fit  £1  light  on  this  fubjecl,  let  me 
further  afk,  whether  bapufm  is  every  thing — any  thing 


55 

*—  nothing,  or  fomething  ?  To  plead  that  it  is  every 
thing,  you  would,  perhaps,  not  be  difpofed,  and  to 
plead  that  it  is  nothing,  would  crofs  your  own  track  j 
and  to  plead  that  it  is  any  thing  (ihat  is)  no  one  deci- 
ded thing,  in  diftincTtion  from  every  other  thing,  would 
render  your  whole  labor  in  this  treatife  vain  ;  for  fure* 
ly,  if  baptifm  be  any  thing,  juft  what  the  fubject  would 
wi(h  to  have  it,,  no  one  in  this  cafe  can  be  wrong  ;  and 
of  courfe  needs  no  correcting.  If  it  be  maintained, 
then,  that  baptifm  be  fomething,  the  mode  is  alfo  fome- 
thing.  I  would  here  afk,  can  there  be  fuch  a  thing  as 
water  baptifm,  without  fome  mo»e?  If  there  cannot,, 
then  mode  is  effential ;  as  there  can  be  no  baptifm  with- 
out. If  then  it  be  proved,  and  that  irrefiltibiy,  that 
fome  mode  is  eflential  to  water  baptifm,  is  it  not  equal- 
ly as  eflential,  what  mode  ?  I  (hall  here  fcle£  the  con- 
feflions  of  feveral  learned  and  pious  divines,  refpecUng 
what  the  ancient  apoflolic  mode  of  baptifm  was  5  the 
greater  part  of  which,  I  fhall  take  from  thofe  who  prac- 
tifed  fprinkling,  notwithftanding  they  made  fuch  coa- 
fiflions. 

41  Do£ior  Mofheim,  a  very  noted  church  hiftorian,  and 
sot  very  friendly  to  the  Baptifts,  bears  direcTteftimony 
that  John,  ChrilVs  forerunner,  and  the  church  rn  the 
firft  ages  of  Christianity,  pra£Vifed  immerfion  as  the 
mode  of  baptifing.  The  following  you  may  take  as  a  farn- 
ple  of  his  evidence.  «  The  exhortations  of  this  refpec- 
table  mcfflngtr  (John)  were  not  without  effect,  and 
thofe  who,  moved  by  his  folemn  admonition,  had  form- 
ed the  refolution  of  correcting  their  evil  difpofitions  and 
amending  their  lives,  were  initiated  into  the  kingdom  of 
the  Redeemer  by  the  ceremony  of  immerfion,  or  bap- 
tifm.,# 

**  Speaking  of  the  church  in  the    fecond  century,  he 

fays,  «  The  perfons  that  were    baptifed,   after   they  had 

repeated  the  creed,  confelTed  and  renounced  their    firs,. 

and  particularly  the  devil  in  his  pompous  allurements^ 

*  Qtnl*  L  Chcrp.  Hi,  SeB,  3. 


59 

were  tnvrnerfed  under  water,  and  received  into  Chrift** 
kingdom  by  a  foiemn  invocation  of  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Ghoft,  according  to  the  exprefs  command  of  our 
blcffed  Lord.* 

«  The  Dotlor  fpeaking  of  fome  inferior  feels  of  the 
feventecnth  century,  and  particularly  of  a  feci:  called 
Collegiants,  fays,  «  Thofe  adult  perfons,  that  defire  to 
be  baptifed,  receive  the  facrament  of  baptifm  according 
to  the  ancient  and  primitive  manner  cf  celebrating  that 
inftitution,  even  by  winter/ton'-^ 

"  Mr.  Bailey,  in  his  Etymological  Englifli  Dictionary, 
fays,  *  In  ancient  times,  this  (baptifm)  being  performed 
by  immerfion,  the  perfons  fo  initiated  went  into  a  river, 
&c.  and  were  plunged.' 

fi  John  Calvin,  in  his  Injlitutlons,  Book  IV.  chap.  xv. 
feci.  19,  fays,  *  It  is  certain  that  the  manner  of  dipping 
was  ufed  of  the  old  church? 

"  Dr.  Cave,  a  great  fearchcr  into  antiquity,  fays, 
*(  That  the  party  baptifed  was  wholly  immerfed,  or  put 
under  water,  which  was  the  common,  constant ',  and  univer- 
Jal  cuftom  of  thofe  times  ;  whereby  they  did  fignificant- 
Jy  exprefs  the  great  end  and  effecls  of  baptifm,  repre- 
senting Chris's  death,  burial  and  refurre&ion,  and,  in 
conformity  thereto,  our  dying  unto  fin,  the  deftrticlion 
of  its  power,  and  our  refurreclion  to  a  new  courfe  of 
life/  &c." 

Thefe  witnefTes  are  contained  in  Merrill's  Seven 
Sermons,  pages  31  and  32  ;  of  whom  I  have  fpoken  in 
a  former  page,  as  being  formerly  a  congregational  miri- 
ifter  ;  who  commenting  on  the  above  quotations,  with 
fcveral  others  of  the  fame  kind,  fays,  page  33  ; 

"  The  reafons  which  are  alleged  why  fprinklinpj  may 
be  fubltituted  for  immerfion,  are,  the  want  of  health,  in 
fome  inftances  where  they  fuppofe  baptifm  to  be  necef- 
fary  ;  the  weaknefs  of  COnftitution  with  refped  to  fome, 

*  Cent.  II.  Part  11.  Chap.  v.  Sett.  1 2.  f  Volume  v. 
page  488. 


€o 


and  the  coldnefs  of  climate  with  refpe£l  to  many,  and 
as  to  all  in  northern  climes  in  the  wintery  feafon.  Here 
is  a  filent  acknowledgment,  that  it  is  not  the  inftitution, 
that  it  is  not  the  permiffion  of  Chrift,  but  mere  acciden- 
tal and  local  circumftances,  which  mak«»  it  lawful  to 
lay  by  the  command  of  Chrift,  and  receive  in  its  Head 
the  precepts  and  commandments  of  men." 

"  The  author  of  the  Letters  (page  34  of  Merrill's  Sev- 
en Sermons)  to  Bifhop  Hoadlyy  in  the  twenty-third  page, 
writes  thus  :  •  Mr.  Baxter,  we  have  already  ften,  ex- 
cufes  the  matter  by  the  coldnefs -of  our  climate.  Cal- 
vin, the  celebrated  reformer  of  Geneva,  obferves  in  his 
Expofnion  of  A£ts  viii.  38,  *  We  fee  here  what  was  the 
baptifma!  rite  among  the  ancients,  for  they  plunged  the 
whole  body  in  the  water." 

Thefe  honed  confr;:flions  of  good  men,  while  they 
fhe'.w  us,  that  notwithstanding  they  might  in  reality  be 
goo  i,  were  utterly  inconfittent  in  making  fuch  confef- 
fions,  and  praclifing  contrary  thereto.  They  alfo  prove 
to  us,  that  immerfion  is  the  only  mode  of  gofpel  bap- 
tifm.  I  have  not  fele&ed  thefe  hun,?.n  teftimonies,  for 
the  want  of  more  witnefs  in  the  word  of  God  ;  but  for 
the  fevkt  of  the  more  Bakiftra&ed  among  my  Predobsp- 
tilt  brethren,  that  th^y  may  fee  wlut  the  conr'eflions 
and  acknowledgments  of  their  more  learned  brethren 
have  been.  To  the  foregoin  ',  I  (hall  aud  a  number  of 
WrtneiTes  of  divine  authority,  that  fpeak  full  to  the  cafe 
now  before  us.  Matt.  Hi.  16,  17.  «  Aud  Jefus,  when 
he  was  baptifed,  went  up  ftraightway  out  of  the  water  : 
and  lo  the  heavens  were  opened  unto  him,  and  he  faw 
the  Spirit  of  GO'S  defcending  like  a  dove,  and  lighting 
upon  him.  And  lo,  a  voice  from  heaven,  faying,  This 
is  my  beloved  Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleated.'  See 
a!f>,  M«jrk  i  9,  10.  '  And  John  alfo  was  bapti- 
Viig  in  Enon,  near  to  Saiem,  becaufe  there  was  much 
water  there. ?  John  iii.  23.  '  And  as  they  went  on  their 
WAy,  they  came  unto  a  certain  water  •:  and  the  eunuch 
(aid,  feej  here  is  water,  what  doth  hinder  me  to  be  bap- 


6i 

tlfed  ?  And  Philip  faid,  if  thou  believeft  with  all  thine 
heart,  thou  mayeft.  And  he  anfweted  and  faid,  I  be- 
lieve that  Jefus  Chrift  is  the  Son  ot  God.  And  he  com* 
'manded  the  chariot  to  (land  (till  :  And  they  went 
down  both  into  the  water,  both  Philip  and  the  eunuch, 
and  he  baptifed  him.  And  when  they  were  come  up  out 
of  the  water,  the  fpirit  of  the  Lord  caught  away  Philip, 
that  the  eunuch  faw  him  no  more.'  Ads  viii.  36,  37, 
38,  39.  *  Know  ye  not,  that  10  many  of  us  as  were 
baptifed  into  Chrift,  were  baptifed  into  his  death  ?  (That 
is,  into  the  figure  of  his  death.)  Therefore  we  are  bu- 
Tied  with  him  by  baptifm  into  death,  that  like  as  Chrift 
was  raifed  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the  Father, 
even  fo  we  alfo  (hould  walk  in  nev/nefs  of  life.'  Rom. 
vi.  3,  4.  '  Buried  with  him  in  baptifm,  wherein  alfo 
you  are  rifen  with  him.'  Col.  ii.  12.  <  Let  us  draw 
near  with  a  true  heart,  in  full  aflurance  of  faith,  having 
our  hearts  fprinkled  from  an  evil  confeience,  and  our  bod- 
ies warned  with  pure  water.'  Heb.  x.  22.  From  thefe  pil- 
lages of  truth  we  are  taught,  firft,  That  in  the  apoftolic 
age,  they  reforted  where  there  was  MUCH  water  for 
baptifm.  Secondly,  That  they  were  vbaptifed  IN  the 
water,  not  out  of  it,  or  round  about  it,  but  IN  it.— ~ 
Thirdly,  That  they  were  BURIED  in  it,  not  fprinkled, 
or  poured  upon,  but  BURIED  in  baptifm.  And  Fourth- 
ly, That  baptifm,  of  itfelf,  is  to  figuratively  hold 
forth  Chrifi's  death,  burial  and  refurreclion  5  and  alfo, 
of  our  death  to  fin,  and  refurre£fcion  to  newnefs  of  life, 
and  true  obedience.  From  all  which  it  is  warrantable 
to  fay,  that  immerfion  or  dipping  is  the  only  mode  of 
baptifm  recorded  in  the  New  Teftament.  None  other 
can  be  produced  :  And  hence,  all  the  pretenfion  of  any- 
other  mode  of  baptifm,  on  the  ground  of  probability, 
where  there  is  no  probability  ;  or  on  the  fandy  founda- 
tion of,  if,  and,  and,  referve,  is  mere  hypocrify,  and 
ought  to  be  viewed  and  treated  as  fuch,  by  every  under- 
ftanding  Chriftian. 

la  the  65th  and  67th  pages,  you  haye  brought  to  view 


b2 

f :  e  cafe  of  Philip  and  the  eunuch,  or  Philip's  baptinng 
the  eunuch  ;  on  which  you  have  made  a  general  com- 
ment. The  firfl  thing  I  fhall  notice  here  is,  you  tell  us  : 
"  The  original  words  here  tranflated  into  and  cut  of  are 
differently  tranflated  in  many  other  pafHges  in  the  New 
Teftament."  You  have  not  been  kind  enough  to  tell 
us  what  they  mean  in  thofe  cafes  where  they  do  not 
mean  the  fame  thing  that  they  do  here.  It  might  puz- 
zle you  or  any  other  man,  to  make  it  appear  that  the 
word  INTO,  in  fome  parts  of  the  word  of  God  mesns 
any  thing  elfe  but  juft  what  it  fays.  It  is  faid  in  a  cer- 
tain place,  that  the  whole  herd  of  fwine  run  violently 
down  a  fteep  place  into  the  fea,  and  were  choked.  I 
fuppofe  that  ro  one  will  be  difpoled  to  plead  that  the 
word  in  this  cafe  was  tranflated  wrong  :  And  if  it  be  a 
.given  point,  that  the  tranflators  did  underftand  the 
meaning  of  the  word  in  this  cafe,  why  not  in  the  cafe 
above.  Another  thing  you  plead  in  this  cafe,  is,  «  That 
ftoing  down  into  the  water,  and  coming  up  cut  of  the 
water,  were  really  no  part  of  baptifrn."  In  this  part  of 
the  argument,  you  have  proved  that  which  I  have  never 
heard  denied,  But  if  a  little  fprinkling  were  fuflicienr, 
where  was  the  neceflity  of  going  into  the  water  ?  You 
here  argue,  that,  fi  From  the  ufaj;e  of  the  exprtfaons 
into  and  out  of,  there  is  the  fame  evidence  that  Philip 
was  immerfed  all  over  in  water,  as  that  the  eunuch  was 
jmmerftd  all  over  in  water" — And,  "  if  now  plunging 
be  proved  from  the  inftance  before  us,  it  muft  be  prov- 
ed folely  from  the  fa£t  ftstec,  that  Philip  baptifed  him, 
and  not  from  the  expreffions  into  and  out  of."  That 
plunging  is  proved  from  the  word  baptife,  is  a  real 
truth  ;  not  only  from  what  has  been  faid,  but  from  the 
ufage  of  the  word  where  t'.ie  baptifrn  of  the  Holy  Ghoft, 
and  the  baptifrn  of  fuffcring  is  fpoken  of.  In  the  ac- 
count given  in  the  id  chapter  of  A6ls,  of  the  baptifrn  of 
the  Holy  Ghoft,  we  are  informed,  that  the  whole  houfe 
wa» filled,  which  muft  necefiarily  have  overwhelmed  the 
apoflles.  And  when  our  Saviour  fpcaks  of  his  own 
£u {Firings,   and  exprefles  it  by  the  word  baptifrn,  what 


<5j 

doss    it  import  ?    That  his  body  was  fprinkled  with   a 
little  pain  ?  No,  certainly  not.     It  was  his  whole  body 
and  foul,   made  to  experience   an  overwhelming  death. 
Hear  him  cry  out  in  the  garden,  *  My  foul  is  exceeding 
ibrrowful,  even  unto  death.'     Hear  his  expiring  groans 
on  the  accuried  tree,     <  My  God  ;   my  God  *,   why  halt 
thou  for  fake  0  me  ?     Which    piercing  voice    fhook   the 
earth,  bur  It  the  rocks,  rent  the  vail  of  the  temple  from 
top  to  bottom.     The  meridian  fun,  at  this  awful  fcene, 
veils  and  hides  his  blufhing  face;    while    the  glorious 
Sun  of  Righteoufnefa  bows  iiis  facred  head,  under  the: 
weight  of  his  Father's  wrath,  winch  he  bore  for  our  fins., 
and  thereby  laid  a  foundation  fuiikient  to  bear  the  whoh- 
weight  of  mercy's  fabrkk.      I  think  the  awful  fufFeiiugp 
of  our  dear  Redeemer,  which  he  expreiTes  by  the  woro 
baptifm,    cannot  be  viewed,    by  any  real  child  of  God, 
(though  he  may  b'e  an  infant  in  grace)  to  import  a  fcnaii 
lprinkiing  with  pain.     No,  furely,  rhey  who  have  been 
made  partakers  of  the  benefits  of  his  death,  have  been 
taught  of  God  a  far  more  underftanding  leilon  of  divine 
truth.     Flear  the  Pfalmift  perforating  Chrilt  in  his  fuf- 
feriaga  :  «  Save  me,  G  God  ;   for  the  waters  have  come 
iii  unto  my  foul.     I 'link  in  deep  mire,  where  there  is  no 
(landing  :  I  am  come  into  deep  waters,  where  the  floods 
overflow  me.     They  that  hate  me  without  a  caufe,  are 
more  than  the  hairs   of  mine  head  t    They  that    would 
deilroy  rr;e,  being  mine  enemies  wrongfully,  are  migh- 
ty :   then  I  reftored  that  which  I  took- not  away.'  Pfalm 
Uix.  I,  2,  and  4;     Moreover,  though  going  into  the  wa- 
ter, and  coming  up  out  of  (he  water,  be  not  baptifm  it- 
fglf,  do:!i  ic-  not  prefuppofe  that  fomethi'g  now   was  to 
be  done  more  than  a  little  fpiinklieg  ?   For  it  could  net 
be  ncctiTary  for  Philip  and  the  eunuch  both  to  defcend 
into  the  water,   merely  for  the  purpofe  cf  fprinkiing. — 
Indeed,  is  not  going  into  the  water,  and  coming  out  or 
the  water,  in  this  cafe,  a  (hiking  witnefs  that  Phiiip  had 
beeti  acruiiomed  to  plunge  people,    when  he    called   it 
baptifm  ?  I  will  here  Rate  a  fimilitude.     Should  a  farm- 
er, who  lived  forty  miles  from  market,    travel  the  oil- 


64 

tance  cf  forty  miles,  in  order  to  fell  a  load  of  whr^ar,  it 
is  certain  that  this  travel  to  market  would  not  be  felling 
the  wheat  in  market ;  and  it  is  equally  as  certain,  that 
he  could  not  fell  the  wheat  in  market  perfonally  himfelf, 
without  fuch  travel.  The  travel  is  one  thing,  and  the 
felling  the  wheat  is  another  :  But  the  former  is  a  pre- 
tflfential  to  the  latter.  The  fame  may  be  faid  of  Philip's 
baptifmg  the  eanueh — going  into  the  water  was  one 
thing,  and  baptiOng  was  another  ;  but  the  former  was 
Lighly  necefTary,  in  order  to  accomplifh  the  latter.  In 
63th  page,  you  have  mentioned  Peter's  preaching  to 
Cornelius,  and  them  that  were  with  him.  In  this  cafe 
you  affirm,  that  "  they  were  then  baptifed  in  the  name 
trf  the  Lord  Jefus.  From  the  statement  it  is  evident, 
they  received  baptifm  at  the  houfe  of  Cornelius." 

Two  things  are  to  be  noticed  here  :  The  fir  ft  is,  that 
there  is  no  podtive  declaration  of  their  being  baptifed  at 
all,  only  that  they  were  commanded  to  be  by  Peter. — 
The  ucond  is>  fince  there  is  no  pofnive  account  of  their 
bting  baptifed  at  all*  I  know  not  where  your  authori- 
ty is,  for  faying  that  they  were  baptifed  at  the  houfe  of 
Cornelius.  The  circumftance  i3  recorded  in  the  tenth 
chapter  of  Acts ;  the  reader  can  examine  it  at  his  leif- 
nre.  In  the  fame  page  you  mention  the  cafe  of  the 
Jailer,  and  fay  concerning  it,  "  It  is  certain  from  the 
reprefentation,  that  Paul  did  not  take  the  Jailer  abroad 
to  baptlfe  him."  To  prove  this,  in  the  69th  page,  you 
fay,  ««  Certainly  Paul  had  net  \dt  the  prifon  j  for  this 
he  would  not  do,  without  the  perfonal  interference  cf 
(he  magiitrates,  by  whom  he  and  his  companion  had 
been  unlawfully  confined." 

Here  are  two  things  to  be  remembered,  the  fir  ft  is, 
they  wt- re  brought  out  of  the  prifon,  before  they  were 
baptifed-,  the  fecond  is,  that  after  they  were  baptifed, 
they  were  brought  into  the  houfe  :  As  may  be  feen  from 
the'face  of  the  ftaternent :  Acts  xvi.  29—  34.  (  Then 
he  called  for  a- light,  and  fprang  in,  and  came  trembling, 


65 

and  fell  down  before  Paul  and  Silas;  And  brought 
ihcm  out,  and  faid,  firs,  what  mult  I  do  to  be  laved  ? 
And  they  faid  believe  on  the  Loid  Jefus  Chrift,  and  thou 
fhalt  be  faved  and  thy  houfe.  And  he  took  them  the: 
fame  hour  of  the  night,  and  walhed  their  [tripes  ;  and 
was  baptifed,  he  and  all  his,  ftrai^htway.  And  when 
he  brought  them  into  his  houfe/  &c.  Another  thing  I 
would  note  here  is,  that  his  houfhold  were  not  baprilcd 
on  his  faith  ;  for  they  all  believed  in  God  as  well  aa 
himfeif.  "Which  is  confirmed  from  the  34th  verfe  : 
<  And  rejoiced  believing  in  God  with  ail  lu3  houfe.'  Ami 
furely  he  could  not  believe  in  God  wijlh  ail  his  houfe, 
unlefs  aii  his  hcufe  believed  with  him.  In  the  69th 
page  you  have  declared,  that  Lydia  was  baptifed  by  the 
river  fide  where  "  Paul  had  been  preaching," 

This  faying  I  think  to  be  (o  unwarantable  from  the 
word  of  God,  that  I  have  little  to  fay  upon  it,  but  would 
refer  the  reader  to  the  account  given  of  the  baptifm  or 
Lydia  in  A<fU  xvi.  13,  14,  15,  and  judge  for  himfeif 
whether  Lydia  was  baptifed  by  the  nver  u^ef  on  in  Uic 
river  ?  In  the  lame  page  you  aflcrt,  "  Paul  and  his  com- 
panions affembled  ai  thcriver  Ode  for  public  worflvip — 
not  for  baptifm."  And  in  a  former  parr  of  this  lt£tioii 
you  fay,  "  and  in  no  inftance  is  it  mentioned  cf  their 
leaving  the  place  where  they  had  been  W6rfhiping  and 
going  to  fome  other,  to  be  baptifed.  In  every  inftaoce 
it  appears  they  were  baptifed  on  the  fpot  where  they 
were  collected  before  they  had  thotighl  cf  receiving  the 
ordinance."  page  6; . 

As  thtfe  thfee  fevsral  fayings  appear  to  amount  to  a- 
bout  the  fame  things.  I  mail  h*  re  fekcl  a  few  paiTagej 
of  truth,  and  leave  the  reader  to  draw  his  own  inference. 
•  Then  COMETH  jefus  from  Galilee  to  Jordan,  unto 
John,  to  be  baptifed  cf  him.'  Mat.  ill.  13.  «  Then  WENT 
out  to  him  Jerufalem,  and  all  Judea,  and  all  the  regio.i 
round  about  Jordan,  and  were  baptifed  of  him  in  Jor- 
dan^  con feSiig  their  fins.'    Ma:,  iii.  5,  6.     *  Then  kid 

i    % 


66 

he  to  the  multitude  that  CAME  FORTH  to  be  baptifed 
of  him.'  Luke  iii.  7.  <  Then  CAME  alfo  publicans 
to  be  baptifed.'  Verfe  12.  <  And  they  CAME  and 
were  baptifed/  John  iii.  23.  '  Behold  the  fame  bap- 
tifeth,  and  all  men  COME  to  him.'  John  iii.  26.  «  And 
it  came  to  pafs  in  thefe  days,  that  Jefus  CAME  from 
Nazareth  of  Galilee,  and  wasbaptifed  of  John  in  Jordan.' 
M-uk  i  9.  '  «  And  AROSE  and  was  baptifed.'  A£ls 
ix  18.  Thefe  paflages  of  divine  authority,  are  10  full 
to  the  cafe  before  us,  I  fhall  leave  the  candid  reader  to 
judge  for  himfelf,  whether  thsy  were  baptifed  on  the 
fpot  where  they  were  collected  before  they  had  thought 
of  being  baptifed,  or  not — and  whether  they  generally 
repaired  to  the  water  fide  for  the  fole  purpofe  of  pubiic 
worfhip;  or  on  the  account  of  repeatedly  baptifing.  In 
the  70th  and  71ft  pages  you  fay*  If  we  counteract  the 
light  of  divine  truth,  in  making  efiential  to  our  commun- 
ion, a  modeK  without  *  a  thus  faith  the  Lord,'  and  which 
he  has  not  feen  fit  to  enjoin,  either  expressly  or  by  im- 
plication, we  make  a  fchifm  among  the  humble  follow- 
ers of  the  Lord,  for  which  we  can  never  atone." 

Sir,  fhould  it  appear  at  laft,  that  infant  fprinkling  has 
no  foundation  in  the  word  of  God  ;  then  I  truft  that  I 
may  fafely  fay  to  you  in  that  cafe,  as  Nathan  did  to  Da- 
vid, thou  art  the  man.  For  furely,  thofe  fchifms  that 
exjft  among  the  people  of  God,  are  undefirable,  but  the 
blame  of  them  mull  fall  on  thofe  that  adopt  maxims 
that  are  not  according  to  divine  rule.  For  the  new  tcf* 
tament  abundantly  teaches  to  withdraw  from  every 
brother  that  walketh  diforderly,  and  him  that  is  an  here- 
fick  after  the  iirft  and  fecond  admonition  to  rejecX  In 
the  7  ifl  page  you  fay  again,  "  But  though  no  one  mode 
of  baptifm  is  particularly  pointed  out  in  the  New  Tefta* 
ment  to  which  we  are  bound  in  all  cafes  implicitly  to  ad- 
here, yet  it  may  be  caniy  Ihown  that  fprinkling  is  2  very 
proper  mode." 

This  faying  appears  to  rae  fo  much  lik?  a  paradox,  that 


67 

I  cannot  fee  In  it  any  thing  (hort  of  a  contradiction  o£ 
itfelf.  For  if  the  word  of  God  has  pointed  out  no  one 
mode  of  baptifm,  how  is  it  poffible  for  fprinkling  to  be 
a  very  proper  mode,  if  we  make  the  word  of  God  our 
rule  ?  Had  you  plead  that  fprinkling  was  confinedly 
the  mode,  there  would  have  been  fome  propriety  in  the 
fcheme  of  itfelf,  though  it  would  have  been  at  a  great 
diftance  from  the  word  of  God.  But  in  your  prefent 
ftatement  I  can  fee  neither  the  fmalleft  traits  of  human 
wifdom,  nor  hear  the  voice  of  revelation.  To  fpend  a 
great  deal  of  of  labor,  and  fill  a  number  of  pages,  in 
trying  to  prove  that  it  is  wholly  unefTential  what  mode 
of  baptifm  is  pradtifed  ;  and  then  go  an  equal  length,  to 
make  it  appear  that  fprinkling  is  anfwering  a  very  valuable 
purpofe,  ond  highly  a  proper  mode,  appears  to  me  fad 
impropriety.  However,  as  it  was  my  firft  defign  to  fol- 
low your  track,  I  fhall  purfue  on,  though  it  may  be  a 
crooked  one,  but  mull  mark  its  windings  and  turnings^ 
as  I  pafs. 

That  fprinkling  is  a  proper  mode  of  baptifm,  you  have 
labored  much  to  maintain,  and  brought  forward  a  num- 
ber of  palTages  of  fcripture  ;  which  are  fo  far  from  being 
to  the  cafe  in  debate,  that  the  moft  part  of  them  are 
brought  from  the  Old  Teftament  >  at  which  lime  bap- 
tifm had  no  being  ;  confequently,  they  cannot  be  to 
the  cafe  in  hand.  Some  of  them  I  fnali  here  notice. — 
One  of  thofe  paffages  you  have  taken  from  the  New  Tef- 
tament,  but  on  that  part  of  the  text  that  fpeaks  to  the 
cafe  in  debate,  you  have  made  no  comment  at  all.  I 
do  not  wonder  at  this,  neither  do  I  blame  you  for  not 
perverting  of  it,  as  you  have  many  others.  No,  this  is 
not  the  fubjeel:  matter  of  blame  ;  the  blame  reds  on  ef- 
poufing  a  caufe  that  cannot  be  fupported  by  the  word  cf 
God,  without  turning  fcripture  out  of  its  own  proper 
meaning.  The  palTage  I  here  have  reference  to,  i3  in 
Hebrews  x.  22,  which  you  have  quoted  in  page  72.-— 
1  Let  us  draw  near  with  a  true  heart,  in  full  affurance 
of  faith,  having  our  hearts  fprinkled  from  zn  evil  con- 


68 

fcience,  and  our  bodies  wafhed  with  pure  water.'  That 
the  lait  part  of  this  text  had  an  immediate  reference  to> 
water  baptifm,  is  clear  from  a  number  of  considerations. 
It  is  confirmed  by  the  very  next  verfe  of  the  (ame  chap- 
ter. 'Let  us  hold  faft  the  profeffion  of  our  faith  with- 
out wavering.'      It  alfo  appears  from  the  very   way  in 
which  the  text   (lands  connected  ;  «  having  our  hearts 
Sprinkled  from  an  evil  confeience.'     This  blefled  woik 
mud  firfi  take  place    before  any  perfon   can  be  fit  for 
baptifm  ;  and  when   this  is  done,  it  is  our  duty  to  have 
our  bodies  wafhed  in  baptilm  ;  not  for  the  fake  of  put- 
ting av/ay  the  filth  of  the  fiefo,    but  for  the  purpofe  of 
anfwering  a  good  confeience  towards  God,  in  obedience 
to  his  holy  command,  and  in  imitation  of  his  example. 
It  further  appears  from  another  confideration,    that  l:-} 
that  there  is  no  ether  way  of  accounting  for  the  text,  a- 
greeable  to  the  tenor  of  the  word  of  God.     What  other 
warning  of  the  body  is  th.:re  fpoken  of  in  the  New  Tef- 
tarnent,  as  of  any  ufe  in  the  Christian  calling  while  iu 
this  world  ?   We  are  informed  by  the  apoftle,    that  he 
ihouid  change  their  vile  bodies,  and  make  ihem    like 
Chilli's  glorious  body.      But  this   is  fpeaking   of  what 
our  Lord  will  do   in  the  morning   of    the  refurrection, 
and  not  of  any  change  wrought  in  this  world  :    And   as 
it  is  certain  that  the  body  is  not   made  holy  when  the 
foul  is  regenerated  j   it  is  equally  as  certain  that  it  is  no 
farther  fubmifliv'e   to  the  word   of  God,   only  as   it  is 
brought  in  fubjugation  by  the  Tew  man,   or  the  divine 
principle  implanted    within.     And    hence    the   apottle 
faith,   '  I  keep  my  body  in  fubjedtion,  ltd  when    I  had 
preached  to  others,  I  myfclf  fhould  be  a  call  away  ;'  and 
alfo,  exhorted  his  brethren   to  prefent  their  bodies  a  iiv- 
ing  Sacrifice,  holy  and  acceptable  unto  God. 

In  the  73d  page,  you  aiTcrt  again- — "  Ikiah  fay?,  *  he 
{hall  fpiinkle  many  nations'  referring,  to  the  three  thou- 
sand baptifed  by  Peter  on  the  day  of  Penteccd,  who 
were  Jews  out  of  ten  different  nations."  Perhaps,  Sir5 
had  you  quoted  the  remaining  part  «f  the  tex*,  t&s. 


6$< 

reader  might  have  been  more  ready  to  judge  for  him- 
felf,  whether  this  prophecy  had  a  reference  to  the  bap- 
tifm  of  th<;  three  thoufand  or  not ;  for  thus  reads  the 
paildge  in  the  bible- — Ifaiah  lii.  13,  14,  15.  «  Behold, 
my  fervant  (hall  deal  prudently,  he  Ihall  be  exalted,  and 
extolled,  and  be  very  high.  As  many  were  aftonied  at 
thee  *,  (his  vifage  was  fo  marred  more  than  any  man, 
and  his  form  more  than  the  fons  of  menj)  fo  ihall  he 
fprinkle  many  nations ;.  the  kings  {hall  tout  their  mouths 
at  him  j  for  that  which  had  not  been  told  them  (hall 
they  fee  ;  and  that  which  they  had  not  heard,  ihall  they 
confider/  I  would  here  afle,  if  this  prophecy  was  ful* 
filled  in  the  baptifm  of  the  three  thoiifand,  how  Peter 
came  to  be  ignorant  of  it  ?  for  it  is  certain  that  he  un- 
derstood what  prediction  took  place,  or  was  fulfilled  at 
their  converfion,  and  makes  mention  of  it  5  which  is — 
c  But  this  is  that  which  was  fpoken  by  the  prophet  Joel, 
And  it  fhall  come  to  pafs  in  the  lad  days,  (faith  God)  I 
will  pour  out  of  my  fpirit  upon  all  fltfh  :  And  your  fons 
and  your  daughters  (hall  prophefy,  and  your  young  men 
fhall  fee  vifions,  and  your  old  men  (hall  dream  dreams.9 
Acts  ii.  16,  17.  Had  lfaiah's  prophecy,  mentioned  2- 
bove,  been  fulfilled  in  the  bapti(moi  the  three  thoufand, 
is  it  not  likely  Peter  would  have  known  it  ?  But  you. 
add  in  the  fame  page,  that  "  Ezekiel  is  flill  more  expli- 
cit. <  Then  will  I  fprinkle  clean  water  on  you,'  not 
blood  and  water  as  Mofes  did,  <  and  ye  (halt  be  clean  : 
from  all  your  filthinefs,  and  from  all  yonr  Idols,  will  I 
cleanfe  you.9  In  the  firfl:  part  of  the  paffage,  there  is  no 
queliion  reference  to  the  mode  of  baptifm  Chrift  would 
own  in  the  gofpel  day.  The  words,  contain  a  predic- 
tion of  literal,  external  fprinkling,  and  not  of  the  in- 
ternal." 

Sir,  if  this  prediction  had  a  reference  to  water  bap- 
tifm, it  is  undeniable,  that  water  baptifm  muft  be 
effectual  to  falvation,  as  may  be  feen  from  the  face  of 
the  ftatement  j  Ezekiel  xxxvi.  25,  26,  27  «  Then  will 
I  fprinkle  cleau  water  upon  you,  and  ye  fhall  be  clean  5 


70 

irotn  all  your  filthincfs,  2nd  from  all  your  Idols,  will  I 
cleanfe  you.  A  new  heart  alfo  will  I  give  you,  and  a 
new  fpirit  will  I  put  within^you,  and  will  take  away  the 
ftony  heart  out  of  your  flcih,  and  I  will  give  you  aa 
heart  of  fl'efti.  And  I  will  put  my  fpirit  within  you, 
and  caufeyou  to  walk  in  my  (tatutes,  and  ye  ihali  k?ep 
my  judgements,  and  do  them.'  From  this  plain  truth, 
it  is  eafy  to  be  feen,  that  the  firlt  part  of  this -quotation, 
had  an  immediate  reference  to  renewing  the  heart  in  re- 
generation ;  and  in  the  laft  part  is  (hown,  what  the  ef- 
fect mould  be,  that  he  would  caufe  them  to  walk  in  his 
itatutes  ;  which  fubjett  is  arranged  according  to  tie 
teuor  of  divine  truth.  To  talk  or  firlt  walking  in  his 
itatutes,  and  then  having  the  heart  changed,  is  armin- 
ianifm  in  the  abltracl  ;  but  it  is  not  the  firlt,  nor  yet  the 
lad  time,  that  this  contemptible  dodlriue  has  made  its 
appearance  in  your  treatife  :  But  more  of  this  hereafter. 
In  the  fame  page,  you  fuTther  add,  "  that  baptifm  by 
fpiinkling,  is  in  fa£t  a  fulfilment  of  prophecy,  and  of 
eourfe,  fuch  as  Chrilt  has  accepted  and  will  own  to  the 
end  of  time." 

I  will  not  fay  that  fprinkling  children  is  not  a  fulfil- 
ment of  prophecy  ;  but  I  give  it  as  my  opinion,  as  one 
that  hath  obtained  mercy  of  the  Lord  to  be  faithful  •, 
that  if  infant  fprinkling  is  a  fulfilment  of  prophecy,  that 
is  found  in  thofe  propheeles  that  fpeak  of  the  kingdom 
of  aotichrift,  coniequentiy  when  found  to  be  pra61ifcd 
by  real  Chriltians,  can  only  be  accounted  for  as  an  im- 
perfection. But  again,  has  Chiiit  ever  owned  and 
bleft  infant  fprinkling  as  an  Ordinance  in  hh  houfe  ? 
If  he  has,  I  am  awfully  miftaken.  Kas  he  ever  bleffcd 
it  as  an  ordinance  in  his  houfe  to  the  awakening  of  the 
ungodly  ?  I  do  not  remember  ever  hearing  this  plead 
in  behalf  of  infant  fprinkling,  in  all  the  fays  and  unfays 
on  this  fubje£t  ;  neither  do  I  believe  that  a  (ingle  foul 
of  its  advocates,  believes  that  1;  has  ever  aafveted 
valuable  purnofe. 


7* 

In  the  74th  page,  you  hare  ufed  what  in  my  opinion 
is  extraordinary  argument  on  this  fubj  r£t,  which  is, 
c<  And  what  (hall  we  fay  of  baptifm  being  performed 
otherwife  than  by  fprinkling  on  the  burning  fands  of 
Arabia,  where  are  no  rivulets  and  fountains  of  water, 
but  where  this  element,  even  for  common  \i(c  is  obtain- 
ed at  3  great  expence  and  with  much  dfBculty  ?  How 
dial  I  the  poor  of  thofe  regions  receive  baptifm,  if  fprink- 
ling be  not  permitted  ?  Or  how  (hall  the  inhabitants  on 
tht  frozen  ocean,  where  all  the  waters  are  bound  in  ice, 
in  thofe  tedious  and  long  rights  they  experience,  re- 
ceive baptifm  by  imrriefGon,  when  to  bury  the  body  in 
water  and  then  to  expofe  it  to  the  air  would  be  attend- 
ed with  iminent  dannger." 

I  would  here  make  fome  enquiry;  are  the  burn- 
ing fands  of  Arabia  inhabited  ?  It  fo,  by  what  kind  of 
people  ?  If  any  of  Adam's  family,  how  do  they  get  their 
jiving  ?  Adam  and  his  family,  were  to  eat  bread  by  the 
fweat  of  their  face.  But  what  kind  of  employ  do  the 
inhabitants  of  Arabia  follow  ?  I  think  that  thofe  parts 
of  it  of  which  you  fpeak,  where  there  are  no  rivulets, 
nor  fountains  of  water,  muft  be  poor  for  grazing,  where 
there  is  not  water  enough  for  the  herds  to  drink;  and 
thofe  barren  finds  muH:  mod  certainly  be  very  poor  for 
cultivation  ;  mercantile  and  mechanic  bufinefs,  muft 
be  dull  in  thofe  barren  regions.  I  think,  fir,  that  all 
thofe  fecular  concerns,  would  be  attended  with  as  great 
difficulty,  as  that  of  baptifm  by  immerfion.  And  with 
regar J  to  the  inhabitants  on  the  frozen  ocean,  they  are 
u'ter  (Grangers  to  me,  of  courfe,  I  know  not  their  way 
of  living,  manner  of  cultivation,  nor  mode  of  baptifm  ; 
neither  did  I  know  before,  that  the  frozen  ocean  was  a 
fuitable  place  for  inhabiting.  But  it  appears  that  the 
fum  of  your  diiTicuhir's  in  thefe  two  cafes,  is,  that  they 
cannot  immerfe  on  the  burning  fands  of  Arabia,  be- 
caufe  there  is  no  water  ;  and  on  the  frozen  ocean  it  is 
all  wattr,  but  it  is  badly  frozen  up  :  I  know  not  how 
thick  the  ice  is  on  the  frozen  ozean,  but  at  a  rifle  would 


.    72 

•s  foon  undertake  to  make  a  hole  fufneient  to  immerfe 
a  man's  body,  as  undertake  to  cultivate  it  for  a  living, 
And  that  fome  part  of  the  country  called  Arabia,  may 
be  inhabited  for  ought  I  know,  I  do  not  pretend  to  fay  5 
but  can  any  man  endowed  with  common  fenfe,  under 
the  excrciie  of  his  right  reafon,  be  carried  fo  far  by  fu- 
perftition  and  tradition  as  to  fuppofe,  that  in  any  part 
-of  the  world  where  people  could  obtain  a  fupply  of  wa- 
ter fufficient  to  anfwer  the  common  purpofes  of  a  living, 
and  yet  not  able  to  baptife,  for  want  of  water,  I  think 
it  hardly  poilible.  What  mud  every  critic  upon  earth 
(who  is  an  enemy  to  God)  think  of  the  caufe  of  virtue 
and  religion,  while  they  hear  its  advocates  adopt  fuch 
arguments  and  men  too  of  the  mod  renowned  learning  | 
rnuft  they  not  conclude  that  the  courfe  is  in  iminent 
danger,  or  that  fuch  advocates  have  not  got  the  light 
of  it  ?  Moreover,  did  not  our  Lord  know,  when  he  com- 
mifhoned  his  fervants  and  fent  them  into  all  the  world, 
to  preach  the  everlafting  gofpel  to  every  creature^  and 
to  baptife  fach  as  believed,  where  their  lots  would  be 
caft  ?  And  did  he  make  any  referve  refpedting  any  fuch 
extreme  cafes?  And  would  he  not  have  done  it  were 
there  any  ?  The  convenience  of  fprinkling,  appears  to 
be  the  tenor  of  your  argument  through  the  remaining 
part  of  this  feclion.  This,  fir,  none  perhaps  will  deny, 
that  fprinkling  is  lefs  trouble,  lefs  mortifying  to  a  proud 
heart,  and  more  immediately  calculated  to  make  the  of- 
fence of  the  crofs  to  ceafe* 

In  your  reflection,  page  76,  you  obferve  that,  «  Thcfe 
who  contend,  that  mode  is  eflentisi,  to  be  confident  with 
themfelves,  muft  either  admit,  that  the  ceremony  by 
which  Chrift,  was  introduced  into  his  work,  was  exact- 
ly the  lame  as  that  which  Aaron  received,  or  that  Chrift's 
induction  was  irregular.  In  view,  therefore,  of  the  bap- 
tifm  of  Chvift  by  John,  we  are  driven  to  this  refult.  Ei- 
ther we  mull  deny  the  pofuion,  that  Chrift  was  incucled 
into  the  prieft's  office  at  all  by  John's  baptifm,  and  aifert 
his  baptifm  to  be  of  fome  other  import  «  or  if  we  cwr 


73 

trie  pofition,  and  yet  plead  that  mode  is  effential,  Chrift 
ftands  charged  with  irregularity.  The  charge  we  dare 
not  make,  the  pofition  we  dare  not  deny  j  the  conclu- 
sion, then  is,  that  Chrift's  example,  teaches  that  mode 
is  not  effential,  and  of  courfe  confirms  the  ftatement  in 
the  fe&ion,  that  no  one  mode  of  baptifm  is  efi'cntial  to 
the  validity  of  the  ordinance,  to  the  exclusion  of  every 
other." 

In  this  ftatement,  you  ftiould  have  faid,  in  order  to  be 
confident  with  your  plan,  inftead  of  faying  in  order  to 
be  confident  with  themfelves.  For  I  know  of  no  fuch 
argument  being  neceilary,  in  order  to  be  confident  with 
the  word  of  God.  "We  are  no  where  informed  in  the 
facred  pages,  that  Chrift  was  made  a  prieft  after  the  or- 
der of  Aaron  ;  neither  that  he  was  baptifed  of  John  to  fit 
him  for  the  prieft's  office.  It  will  alfo  be  remembered 
here,  that  the  only  witnefs  that  you  have  produced  in 
your  whole  book,  that  Chrift  was  baptifed  by  John  in 
order  to  fit  him  for  the  prieft's  office  is,  your  own  bare 
aftertion,  that,  "  it  could  be  no  other  than  ceremonial 
righteoufnefs,"  (page  6i,)  which  he  fulfilled  by  his  bap- 
tifm. If  fir,  this  is  all  the  authority  that  can  be  produced 
for  the  pofition,  in  the  above  quotation,  (which  you  fay 
you  dare  not  deny,)  I  think  that  a  little  holy  boldnefs  in 
the  caufe  of  God,  would  grant  fufficient  courage  to  a 
foldier  of  Jefus  Chrift,  to  deny  it  utterly,  ancf  challenge 
all  the  nations  of  the  earth  to  prove  it  from  the  word  of 
God.  And  hence  it  is  evident,  as  I  have  heretofore 
fhown,  that  Chrift  was  baptifed  of  John,  in  order  to  fet 
an  example  for  his  followers  ;  and  of  courfe,  in  order 
to  be  confident  with  ourfelves.  If  we  profcfs  to  follow 
him,  we  mud  go  and  do  likewife  $  for  we  are  utterly 
inconfiftent  while  we  profefs  to  follow  him  and  go  a  road 
that  he  has  never  gone. 

I  fhall  now  briefly  notice  your  3rh  fecYion,  which  you 
entitle,  "  Ri^ht  of  baptifm  in  the  parent,  faith  gives  the 
right  in  the  fight  of  God,  vifible  evidence  of  faith  in  the 
G 


74 

light  of  men."  Page  77.  The  firfl  thing  you  offer  en 
this  fubje£t  ir,  "  Infant  baptifm  being  admitted,  an  im- 
portant queftion  arifes  refpecling  the  right  of  baptifm. 
This  (in  a  certain  fenfe,)  is  an  important  queftion  in  ve- 
ry deed  ;  which  fhouid  have  been  efUbliihed  with  a 
thus  (aith  the  Lord,  before  infant  baptifm  was  admit- 
ted ;  or  infant  baptifm  fhouid  not  have  been  admitted 
at  all.  And  had  infant  baptifm  thus  been  omitted  un- 
til fuch  warrant  were  produced,  it  would  have  remained 
in  eternal  filence  •,  unltfs  God  fhouid  be  pleafed  to  make 
fome  other  revelation  on  this  fubj.'£t,  than  is  contained 
in  the  fcriptures  of  truth.  In  the  fame  page,  you  have 
made  a  folemn  confeiTion,  which  tho:  it  is  really  truth, 
has  rendered  the  whole  of  your  arguments  in  the  treatife 
ridiculous,  which  is,  *'  The  tight  of  baptifm  cannot  He 
in  the  one  who  has  no  agency,  in  caufing  baptifm  to  be 
.adminifteted." 

If  this  obfervation  is  both  truth  and  good  fenfe,  (as  it 
■really  is,)  what  truth  err  fenfe  can  there  be,  in  infant 
fprinkling  ?  What  agency  has  an  infant  in  caufing  bap- 
tifm to  be  administered  ?  Surely  none  at  all.  No,  fir, 
this  you  have  not  in  this  page  argued,  but  even  tell  us, 
"  that  one  has  a  right  to  baptifm,  who  does  not  adt,  nei- 
ther is  capable  of  acting,  nor  has  any  knowledge  of  the 
tranfaction,  is  very  difiicult  to  conceive."  And  if  in- 
fants have  not  a  right  to  baptifm  by  what  authority  do 
you  baptife  them  ?  In  the  78th  page  you  very  hontftly 
confsfs,  that  "  Thofe  who  nold  to  infant  baptifm  do  not 
ail  agree  among  thenuelves." 

No  fir,  neither  is  it  likely  that  they  ever  will,  while 
holding  this  fentiment,  for  two  reafons  j  the  fir  ft  is, 
that  there  is  no  ftandard  for  it  in  the  word  of.  GoJ  ; 
whertby  they  may  become  uniformed  j  the  fecond  is. 
if  th"re  is  no  authority  for  it  in  the  w  id  of  Gon,  it 
n  nit  be  the  tradition  of  men  :  Confequcntly  feme  • 
3ike  the  B~bel  of  cij,  the  builders  of  which,  God 
founded  the  language  of,  to  prevent  the  rife  of  it.  \\ 


» 


75' 

fayihgs,  I  believe  in  my  heart,  are  very  congenial  to  the 
practice  of  infant  fprinkling.  Some  on  this  fubjedl  cry 
one  thing,  and  fome  another,  like  the  confufed  affembly 
at  Ephefus ;  the  more  pait  know  not  what  retreat  to 
make  next.  In  the  fame  page  you  note,  "  Circumcifion 
was  never  the  right  of  any  except  of  believers.-  It  is 
the  fame  with  baptifm.  It  is  profanation  in  God's 
fight  to  prefent  him  an  offering  without  faith." 

That  circumcifion  was  never  the  right  of  any  but  be- 
lievers, will  not  bear  the  ted  of  divine,  or  is  not  accor- 
ding to  the  word  of  truth.  Unlefs  it  can  be  proved, 
that  Ifhmael,  zvA  all  born  in  Abraham's  family,  and  all 
bought  with  his  money,  were  believers  ;  for  thus  reads 
the  word  of  God  \  «  And  Abraham  took  Ifhmael  his  fon, 
&  all  that  were  bom  in  his  houfe,  &  all  that  were  bought 
with  his  money*  every  male  among  th«  men  of  Abra- 
ham^ houfe,  and  circumeifed  the  flefh  of  their  forefkin, 
in  the  fclf  fame  day,  as  God  had  f aid  unto  him.'  Gen. 
xvii.  23. 

One  thing  more  I  would  obfervc  as  it  refpe£U  this  laft: 
quotation  1  In  it  you  import  that  none  but  believers  have 
a  right  to  bapiifm,  which  is  a  real  truth  ;  but  how  men 
can  make  fuch  confefTiofiSj  and  practice  entirely  con- 
trary I  cannot  determine.  But  in  order  to  confirm  this 
point,  that  ncn::  but  believers  have  a  right  to  baptifm,  I 
iliall  herein  addition  to  what  I  have  heretofore  offered,, 
feie£t  a  few  pteiti  and  pofitive  fcripfures.  Mark  xvi.  15. 
16.  '  And  he  laid  unto  them  go  ye  into  all  the  world,  & 
preach  the  gofpel  to  every  creature  :  He  that  beiieveth, 
and  13  b^rafed  (hzW  befaved.'  Acts  viii.  12.  '  But  when 
they  believed  Philip  preaching  the  things  concerning  th--; 
kingdom  of  God  and  the  name  of  Jefus  Chrift,they  were, 
baptifed  both  men  and  women.'  Acts  ii.  41.  *  Then  they 
that  gladiy  received  his  word  were  baptifed.'  Acts  xviii 
£.  *  And  many  of  the  Corinthians,  hearing,  believed, 
and  were  baptifed/  Acls  x.  47.  *  Can  any  man  forbid 
v>ater,  that  fchefe  fhooid  not  be  baptifed,  which  h*v:  re- 


:]6 

cch'td  the  Holy  Ghoft  as  well  as  we  ??  Acts  iii.  38. 
•  Then  Peter  (aid  unto  them,  repent,  and  be  baptiied. 
Acls  viii.  36,  37,  38.  *  And  as  they  went  on  their  way, 
they  came  unto  a  certain  water  ;  And  the  eunuch  faid, 
fee,  here  is  water  ;  what  doth  hinder  me  to  be  baptifed  ? 
And  Philip  faid,  if  thou  believed  with  all  thy  heart,  thou 
tnayeft.  And  he  anfwercd  and  faid,  I  bejieve  that  Je- 
fus  Chrift  is  the  Son  of  God.  And  he  commanded  the 
chariot  to  (land  ftill  ;  And  they  went  down  both  into 
the  water,  both  Philip  and  the  eunuch  ;  and  he  baptifed 
hinV 

Thefe  paflages  of  divine  truth,  in  unifon  with  othei 
palTages  in  the  word  of  God,  confirm  the  point  beyond 
a  doubt,  that  no  unbeliever,  hath  the  fmalleft  right  to 
the  ordinance  of  baptifm.  This  point  is  alfo  acknowl- 
edged by  your  own  confeilion  in  page  79,  which  is,  "  In 
the  apoftolic  age  before  a  general  corruption  had  found 
its  way  into  the  churches,  failh  was  viewed  an  indefpen- 
iable  reqnjfite  to  an  acceptable  Jedjcation  to  God  in  bap- 
tifm.  The  faith  of  the  eunuch  muft  precede  his  bap- 
<ilV;.  There  is  not  an  inftance  of  either  houfhold  or 
aduk'baptifm  in  the  names  of  the  Trinity,  ftated  in  the 
New  Teitament,  unlefs  connected  with  an  exhibition  of 
faith  in  Chrilt.  In  after  ages,  the  apoftolic  practice 
was  fuperceded  to  an  awful  degree  by  a  fpurious  and 
formal  obfervance  of  duty,  out  of  which  grew  a  pro- 
mifcuous  adminiftration  of  ordinances,  unknown  from 
the  beginning.  The  corruption  has  run  through  pad 
ages  and  reached  our  own  times." 

The  fir  ft  p.art  of  this  quotation  is  an  awful  co«fefiion  y 
when  found  in  your  treatife,  it  fquarely  contradicts, 
and  overthrows  a  great  part  of  the  arguments  contained 
in  your  book,  contradi&s  them  becaufe  it  is  in  opposition, 
overthrows  them  becaufe  it  is  truth,  and  confequently 
every  oppofite  argument  cannot  be.  And  in  the  latter 
part  of  this  quotation  you  hit  at  the  root  of  the  bufinefs, 
and  I  bdieve  in  the  fear  of  God  given  us   an  account 


77 

of  the-  very  way  th#t  infant  fprinkling  firft  took  its 
rifr  ;  for  it  is  a  certainty  it  did  not  originate  in  the 
apoltles'  day  •,  neither  until  the  latter  part,  of  the  fecond 
or  beginning  of  the  third  century.  In  the  8oth  p2ge, 
you  bear  a  heavy  hand  againft  thofe  that  baptife  the  chil- 
dren of  unbelievers,  and  argue  that  it  is  calculated  to  lull 
thvjm  to  flsep,  and  make  them  think  they  are  in  the  road 
to  heaven,  while  they  arc  in  the  gall  of  bitternefs  and 
bond  of  iniquity.  Sir,  is  not  fprinkling  infants  cf  any 
parentage  whatever,  rendering  all  who  practice  it,  guil- 
ty of  the  fame  awful  fio  ?  Call  to  mind  your  own  ftate- 
ment  in  the  8o-h  and  8 ill  pages,  and  fee  if  thou  art  not 
the  man  ;  your  words  are,  «*  The  language  of  a£ti?n  is 
more  forcible  than  that  of  words.  We  may  as  well  tell 
tinners,  they  are  in  no  danger,  as  by  action  to  put  thenv 
on  a  level  with  faints/5 

Sir,  if  ycu  practice  the  fentiments  contended  for  in 
theie  feclions,  do  you  not  by  this  confeffion  own  that 
ycu  are  guihy  of  .telling  tinners  that  they  are  in  no  dan- 
ger ?  If  infants  while  unregenerated,  are  to  be  baptifed, 
received  into  the  church,. and  treated  as  farbjetts  of  God's 
houfe,  are  they  placed  on  a  level  with  faints  in  this 
refpedr,  ?.  What  honor  and  preferment  is  this?  The 
tenor  of  your  arguments  is,  that  they  are  received  into 
the  church  agreeable  to  the  word  of  God.  And  what 
faith  Chrifi  concerning  fuch  ss  are  in  this  building  ?  Up- 
on this  rock  will  I  build  my  church,  and  the  gates  of 
hell  fiiall  not  prevail  againft  it. 

I  (hall  haften  to  make  a  few  remarks  on  your  ninth 
Section,  which  you  entitle,.  ««  Baptifm  in  the  Isfarne  of 
the  Trinity,  adminiftered  by  a  reputed  proper  Officer  in 
the  Church  not  to  be' repeated."  Your  faying  in  this 
fecfjon,  can  be  of  no  ufe,  fince  your  arguments  in  the 
preceding  fe&ions,  on  which  thefe  are  founded,  are  re- 
r-iQved  by  fair  argument  and  the  word  of  God.  That 
baptifm,  according  to  the  word,  is  not  to  be  repeated,  is 
an  undoubted  truth.  But  docs  this  argue,  that  the  tw* 
a  % 


7* 

dition  of  men  in  fprinkling  infants,  renders  baptifm  un« 
neceiTaTy  ?  You  appear  in  this  fe£Uon,  in  the  Sift  and 
82(1  pages,  to  plead  much  with  regard  to  reputed  prop- 
er officers  in  the  church,  as  though  what  they  did  mull: 
be  valued  unavoidably.  I  would  here  query,  that  on  the 
condition,  that  infant  fpriokling  has  no  foundation  in 
the  word  of  God,  (as  it  evidently  has  not)  whether 
there  can  be  a  gcfpel  church,  or  a  gofpel  adminiftrator, 
who  have  not  been  baptifed  according  to  the  word,  tho' 
they  might  have  been  fprinkled  in  infancy  ?  That  they 
arc  Chriftians,  may  with  propriety  be  admitted  ;  and 
that  perhaps  fome  of  them  may  be  bleft  with  the  gift 
of  preaching,  will  be  admitted  with  equal  propriety.— 
But  a  number  of  people  being  Chriftians,  does  not  prove 
that  they  are  a  «hurch  of  Chrift  ;  unlefs  they  are  or- 
ganized into  a  church  according  to  the  word.  Thus 
we  fee  the  apoHle  was  faid  to  plant  churches,  that  is, 
organize  them  into  a  church  ;  not  convert  them  *,  this 
was  the  work  of  the  Lord.  But  the  apoftle*6  work  in- 
planting  churches  was,  to  organize  them  into  a  church, 
after  the  Lord  had  converted  them.  The  fame  may  be 
faid  concerning  gofpel  adminiftrators.  None  but  an  in- 
finite  God  can  grant  them  the  internal  qualifications  for 
the  work  of  the  miniftry,  notwithftanding  it  is  neceffa- 
ry  that  they  fhould  be  regularlly  fet  apart  for  the  work, 
And  hence  we  fee  Ananias  exhort  Saul  after  his  con- 
version, to  arife  and  be  baptifed  •,  and  after  this  the  Ho- 
ly Ghoft  faying,  feparate  me  Barnabas  and  Saul  for  the 
work  whereur-to  I  have  called  them  \  accordingly  the 
Apoftles  laid  their  hands  on  them  and  fent  them  forth. 
Thus  we  fee  that  it  is  not  every  Chriftian,  that  i&a  mem- 
ber gf  the  vifible  church  of  God  ;  though  he  is  of  the 
inviiible,  and  not  every  proft (led  minifter,  that  is  a  legal 
administrator.  In  the  82d  page,  fpeaking  of  rebaptifingy 
you  fay,  »«  While  the  praclice  fofters  difiention,  it  tends 
directly  to  build  up  thofe  who  tolerate  it  in  pride  and 
vain  glory,  and  to  make  them  fomc  how  or  other  con» 
ceives  thai  they  alone  arc  right." 


79 

Sir,  fhould  you  once  experience  what  it  is  to  follow 
the  meek  and  lowly  Saviour  in  the  ordinance,  accord- 
ing to  the  word  of  God,  you  would,  perhaps,  be  better 
fitted  to  judge  whether  the  effect  was  pride  and  vain  glo- 
ry ;  whether  it  was  immediately  calculated  to  (lain  the 
pride  of  the  human  heart,  and  afford  joy  in  the  Holy 
Ghoft,  which  is  unfpeakable  and  full  of  glory  j  and  that 
this  reflection  wasmade  in  candor,!  can  by  no  means  dif- 
prove,  but  I  am  flow  of  heart  by  any  means  to  believe 
it.  But,  that  thofe  who  practice  gofpel  ordinances,  as 
Chrift  delivered  them  to  the  faints,  believe  that  they 
alone  are  right  in  this  particular,  is  an  undoubted  truth  : 
Yea,  and  fo  fteadfaftly  believe  it,  that  all  the  feoffs  of 
wicked  men,united  with  the  reflection  of  thofe  who  pro- 
fefs  to  be  good  men,  cannot  drive  them  from  the  prac- 
tice. One  thing  more  I  would  notice  in  this  quotation, 
which  is,  you  intimate  here  that  the  practice  of  re-bap- 
tifing  fofters  Hiffentien.  By  this,  I  fuppofe  you  mean, 
that  when  the  Baptifts  baptife  thofe  who  have  been 
fprinkled  in  their  infancy,  that  this  in  your  judgement 
is  re-baptizing,  and  calculated  to  fofter  diffention.  I 
know  not  how  elfe  to  underftand  you,  as  I  know  of  no 
denomination  that  practice  the  repetition  of  baptifm.  If 
this  under  (landing  be  correct,  I  would  anfwer,  that  the 
Baptifts  do  not  practice  the  repetition  of  baptifm  *,  and 
in  order  for  it  to  be  made  to  appear  they  do,  it  will  be 
neceffary  to  prove  that  infant  fprinkling  is  baptifm.— 
Perhaps  by  the  time  this  is  done,  the  Baptift  will  be 
willing  to  bear  the  charge  of  re-baptifing,  or  forfake  the 
practice.  Moreover,  that  the  practice  of  baptifing  ac- 
cording to  the  word,  thofe  who  were  fprinkled  in  their 
infancy  fofters  diffention,  I  (hall  not  deny,  neither  make 
any  apology  for  it,  only  note  that  the  propriety  or  im- 
propriety of  diffention  muft  be  determined,  on  the  prin- 
ciple of  what  it  is  that  men  diffent  from.  If  men  dif- 
fent  from  that  which  is  evil  and  cleave  to  that  which  is 
good,  it  can  be  no  crime.  For  the  apoftles  to  diffent 
from  the  Jewi(h  church  in  its  polluted  (late,  was  not  a 
crime j  though  the  Jews  made  much  complaint  about 


to 

it.  For  the  Church  of  England,  to  difTcnt  from  the 
abominations  of  the  Romiih  church,  fo  far  as  they  did 
tliiTe«t,  was'not  unrighteoub ;  ami  for  the  Pre  fbytetians, 
and  oilier  diffenters,  to  iorfake  the  errors  of  the  Churcli 
of  England,  is  not  to  be  condemned.  And  when  the 
Baptifts  diflrnt  from  infant  fprinkling,  they  believe  they 
are  equally  as  juftifiable. 

I  (hall  now  make  a  few  remarks  on  your  tenth  Sec- 
tion, which  you  entitle,  '**  The  Communion  of  God's 
vifible  People  to  be  regulated  by  Chrift's  Precept  and 
Example" — page  83.  Your  firft  remark  on  tliis  fub- 
je£t  is — "  It  is  matter  of  lamentation  and  to  be  depre- 
cated, and  for  which  Zion  fits  folitary  and  mourns,  that 
fo  many  of  the  various  denominations  refufe  to  com- 
mune together,  even  while  they  hold  each  other  in  char- 
ity as  chriftians,  united  to  one  common  Lord  in  bonds 
of  indiiToluble  affection.  When  we  fee  the  real  friends 
of  Jefus  not  willing  to  meet  each  other  at  the  feaii  to 
which  he  invites  his  friends,  indifcriminatcly,  faying, 
'  eat  O  friends,  drink  ye  abundantly,  O  beloved/  we 
cannot  refrain  the  enquiry  \  is  there  a  caufe  ?" 

That  it  is  a  matter  of  deep  lamentation,  that  God's 
children  are  fo  differently  opinionated  while  in  this  vale 
of  tears,  no  real  Chriftian  can  difpute.  But  the  blame 
of  the  difcord  caufed  thereby,  mud  fall  on  thofe  that  de- 
part from  the  rules  of  the  gofpel.  For  we  are  exprefs- 
ly  commanded  to  withdraw  from  every  brother  that 
walketh  diforderly,  and  not  according  to  the  tradition 
received  of  the  Apoftles.  2  TheiT.  iii.  6.  It  is  evident 
from  the  word  of  God,  that  if  men  prcfefs  to  be  follow- 
ers of  the  Saviour,  and  the  fame  time,  trifle  with  one  of 
the  ordinances  of  the  gofpel,  tha*  they  are  not  to  be  ad- 
mitted to  the  other.  In  the  fame  pzge,  you  afk  :  •*  In 
keeping  from  our  embrace  a  brother  difciple,  is  there  a 
good  reafon  which  we  can  avow  in  a  dying  moment,  in 
our  1  aft  prayer,  in  the  open  court  of  heaven*  and  at  tHfi 
F-edeernefs  bar  V' 


Sr 

r  In  order  to  anfwer  your  query,  it  ought  firft  to  be 
known,  who  this  brother  difciple  is.  If  he  is  a  Chrif- 
tian,  walking  as  fuch,  taking  the  word  of  God  as  the 
man  of  his  council,  holding  the  faith  in  a  pure  con- 
fcience,  walking  blamelefs  in  fome  good  degree,  and 
keeping  the  ordinances  of  God's  houfe,  no  undcrftand- 
ing  Chriftian  can  be  difpofed  to  reject  him.  But  if  he 
does  not  in  fome  good  degree  come  up  to  the  fciipture 
requirement,  there  aTe  fufficient  reafons  that  may  be 
avowed,  to  hold  him  from  communion  ;  for  he  that 
biddeth  him  God  fpeed  is  partaker  of  his  evil  deeds.  la 
the  84th  and  85th  pages,  you  obferve  again — "  Ic  is 
true,  in  the  forms  of  worfhip,  the  primitive  chriftian^ 
did  not  wholly  agree.  The  Jewifh  converts  from  long 
cuftom,  and  the  reverence  they  entertained  for  the  tra- 
dition of  their  fathers  were  peculiarly  attached  to  cer- 
tain parts  of  the  Mofaic  ritual.  Though  circumcifion 
and  the  paffbver  had  been  fuperfeded  by  baptifm  and  the 
Lord's  fupper,  yet  they  could  not  at  once  be  prevailed 
on  to  relinquifh  the  obfervance  of  the  former.  The 
gentiles,  who  were  converted  directly  from  idolatry  to 
chriftianity,  though  they  gave  the  fulleft  credit  to  the 
old  teftament,  felt  themfelves  by  no  means  bound  to 
thofe  ancient  obfervances.  But  even  this  difagreemenr, 
though  it  was  more  than  a  mere  matter  of  form,  produ- 
ced nothing  like  a  fchifm  in  the  church." 

Is  this  a  truth,  that  the  difciples  and  ancient  Chrif- 
tians  having  among  them  thofe  that  were  tenacious  about 
circumcifion,  made  nothing  like  a  fchifm  in  the  church  ? 
I  think  the  word  of  God  will  furnifh  us  with  a  very 
different  account.  Let  us  iiften  once  more  to  its  infpi- 
rcd  voice.  A6ls  xv.  1,2.  '  And  certain  men  which 
come  down  from  Judes,  taught  the  brethren,  and  faid, 
Except  ye  be  circumcifed  after  the  manner  of  Mofes,  ye 
cannot  be  faved.  When  therefore  Paul  and  Barnabas, 
had  no  ((nail  diiTention  and  difputation  with  them,  they 
determined  that  Paul  and  Barnabas,  and  certain  other 
of  them,  fhould  go  up  to  Jcrufaiem  unto  the  apoftles 


8fc 

«ni  elders  about  this  queftion.'  The  28th  and  29th 
verfes  will  furnifti  us  with  the  refult  of  this  council  at 
jerufalcm,  which  is,  '  For  it  feemed  good  to  the  Holy 
Ghoft,  and  to  us,  to  lay  upon  you  no  greater  burdens 
than  thefe  neceffary  things  :  That  ye  abftain  from  meats 
offered  to  idols,  ;  and  from  blood,  and  from  things 
flrangled,  and  from  fornication  :  from  which  if  ye  keep 
ycurfelves,  ye  fhall  do  well.     Fare  ye  well/ 

Do  thefe  fcriptures,  and  your  affertion  agree  ?  or  is 
there  a  diredl  oppofition  between  the  one  and  the  other  ? 
We  are  informed  by  thefe  paffages,  that  the  teaching  of 
circumcifion  caufed  much  difTentioti  and  difputation  ; 
mfomuch  they  fent  up  to  Jerufalem,  and  collected  a 
general  council  on  the  fubjccX  l£our  affertion  is  that 
it  caufed  nothing  like  a  fthifm  in  the  church.  This 
matter  is  brought  to  a  pointed  df  cifion,  in  Gal.  v.  1 1, 
12,  'And  I,  brethren  if  I  yet  preach  circumcifion  ; 
then  is  theoffence  cf  the  crcfs  ceafed.  I  would  they  were 
even  cut  off  which  trouble  you.'  If  the  reader  will 
examine  the  preceding  part  of  the  chapter,  he  will  find 
that  this  text  is  full  to  the  cafe  now  before  us.  In  your 
o6ih  page,  you  have  ured  another  expreffion,  (in  oppo- 
ftng  particular  communion,)  which  may  entangle  the 
feelings  of  the  weak  Chriftian,  which  is,  "  This  vifibie 
reparation,  while  it  is  opposed  to  Chrift's  precepts  and 
example,  militates  againft  all  the  feelings  of  a  heart  du- 
ly warmed  with  the  love  of  God." 

I  would  here  aik  a  few  feriops  queflions.  1.  Is  (tpz?? 
ting  from  every  brother  that  walketh  diforderly,  oppo- 
0  Chrift's  precept  and  example  ?  2.  Is  it  oppofed 
to  the  cleared  dictates  of  the  love  of  God  ?  3.  Does  not 
the  love  God  and  the  word  of  God,  unitedly  lead  io  one 
line  of  conducl  ?  4  Does  the  love  of  God  lead  men  to 
bear  iniquity,  or  harbor  fin  upon  a  brother  ?  5.  If  not, 
muft  the  blame  of  feperation,  reft  on  thofe  that  depart 
from  the  word  of  God,  and  its  ordinances  ?  6.  Are  you 
and  your  denomination  in  general,  fiwcerely  cefirous.  c*- 


*3 

communing  with  the  Baptiils  ?  7,  If  not,  why  is  this  ado, 
about  communion  ?  If  you  do,  vihy  have  your  denomi- 
nation perfecuted  the  Baptiils  fo  generally,  when  they 
have  had  it  in  their  power,  by  obliging  them  to  pay  your 
ministers,  in  whom  they  did  not  believe,  and  by  oblig- 
ing of  them  to  build  meeting  houfes  for  your  denomi- 
nation, when  they  were  too  poor  to  build  their  own  ? 
See  Conedicut,  MafTachufetts,  &c.  9.  Why  fhut  your 
doors,  againft  Baptift  minifters  preaching  with  you,  if 
you  wiih  ro  commune  with  them  at  the  Lord's  table  ? 
10.  Why  pafs  laws,  in  your  Prefbytery,  not  to  admit 
Baptift  minifters  to  preach  where  you  have  dated  meet- 
ings, except  it  fhou!d  be  certain  perfons  that  (hall  be 
judged  not  likely  to  divide  the  people  ?  11.  Is  the  gene- 
ral treatment  of  your  denomination  towards  the  Baptifts 
fuch  as  befpeaks  that  they  are  (incerely  defirous  to 
commune  with  them  ?  12.  If  you,  and  your  brethren, 
do  not  wifii  to  commune  with  the  Baptifts,  is  it  not  hy- 
pocrify  to  pretend  it  ?  13.  Do  the  Baptifts  debar  you 
from  your  own  communion  ?  And  have  you  not  all  times 
a  communion  among  themfelves  ?  As  I  fee  nothing  in 
this  fe&ion  that  I  wife  to  remark  further  on,  Iihall  not 
enlarge  on  this  fubjedt,  as  the  fuhjodfc  of  particular  com- 
munion, has  been  already  largely  treated  on,  by  a  num- 
ber of  my  abler  brethren,  but  pnfs  to  notice  your  elev- 
enth fecTtion  which  you  entitle*  M  Difcription  of  a 
church  duly  organized  and  keeping  covenant."  Page  87. 

This  feftion  contains  fome  important  truths,  to  which 
I  would  be  willing  to  fubfenbe,  if  they  were  properly 
feparated  from  the  error  contained  in  the  fame  feclion. 
But  as  it  is  not  my  defign  to  comment  on  that  part  of  ycur 
book  that  I  judge  to  be  truth,  and  as  the  greater  part 
of  the  errors  in  this  fe£lion  have  been  ex-pofed,  in  noti- 
cing your  foregoing  ftaiements,  I  (hall  r&ake  bu*  few  re- 
marks here.  I  (hall,  however*  notice  fome  of  youT  fay- 
in£3  here  &  compare  them  with  fome  of  your  foregoing. 
"Your  firft  obfervations  en  this  futjrct  is,  "  A  cyu  rch 
of  Chriit  conQlt?  of  a  body  of  profeffing  believers  u-'v 


84 

nannng  together,on  gofpel  principles,  for  mutual  edifica- 
tion, in  honor  of  Chrift  and  his  bleiTed  ordinances  and 
inititions.  When  having  folemnly  and  publicly  covenant- 
ed before  God,  angels  and  men,fuch  an  aflbciation  of  be- 
lievers becomes  a  church  of  Chrift/'  Page  87.  In  your 
inference  page  32,  you  tell  us,  "  If  Chrift  has  never 
had  but  one  church  in  the  world,  or  if  the  gentile  church, 
is  the  jewifh  church  extended,  then  infant-memberfhip, 
under  the  gofpel  difpenfation,  is  firmly  eftablifhed." 

I  have  here  no  further  comment  to  make  on  thefe 
quotations,  only  rtqueft  the  reader,  to  fee  if  he  can  find 
any  infants  in  the  firftquotation,  if  he  cannot,  try  to  re- 
concile the  two  fayings  5  and  if  he  cannot, put  what  con. 
ftru£tion  on  them,  as  he,  in  the  fear  of  God,  may  think 
proper.  In  the  09th  page,  you  fay,  "  A  church  main- 
taining a  clofe  walk  with  God,  wiil  afford  her  baptifed 
offspring  all  the  advantages  of  her  peculiar  and  united 
watch.  She  will  have  feafons  let  apart  for  publicly  in- 
ftru£ling  the  Lambs  of  the  fold,  when  her  united  pray- 
er will  go  up  to  God  fcr  them.  A  church  feeling  as 
{he  ought  to  feel,  will  be  on  her  knees  for  her  little 
ones,  which  had  been  given  to  God  in  baptifm." 

I  would  here  juft  afk,  if  the  Lambs  of  the  fold,  are 
the  little  ones  given  to  God  in  fprinkling  ?  If  they  are, 
I  would  a(k  agoin  how  they  became  Lambs  of  the  fold  ? 
Whether  it  is,  by  giving  them  to  God  in  fprinkling  ?  If 
they  do,  is  not  this  the  very  ftatement  that  infant  fprink- 
'  ling  was  Brit  eftabliftied  on?  that  is, that  infant  fprinkling 
was  regeneration,  and  confequently,  efiential  to  falva- 
tion.  If  it  be  thought  that  thefe  queries  do  not  prop- 
erly arife  from  the  premifes  you  have  laid  down,  I  would 
date  a  few  others.  Firft,  what  do  you  mean  when  you 
fpeak  of  giving  them  to  God  in  fprinkling  ?  Has  not 
the  Lord  a  juli  right  to  do  with  them  as  he  may  fee  fir, 
^without  any  of  our  confent  ?  What  erTe£t  has  it,  on  the 
infant  that  can  be  counted  fo  very  valuable  ?  I  think  it 
to  be  worfe  than  mere  nonfcnfe  for  men  of  the  moft  re- 


nowned  talent3  to  plead  fo  much  itt  favor  of  infanl 
fprinkling,  and  that  it  is  of  fo  much  confluence  but  not 
able  in  one  inftance  to  tell  wherein.  In  the  90th  page 
you  fay,  "  I  am  conftrained  to  mention,  in  this  place., 
what  I  believe  mod  lamentably  true,  that  the  conduct,  or 
churches  towards  their  baptifed  children  is  a  fcurce  of 
evil  fcarcely  exceeded  by  any  other." 

I  know  not  that  this  faying  needs  any  comment  at 
all  ;  for  the  very  face  of  it  when  found  in  your  trcatiiY, 
is  fufneieni  to  prove  to  any  rational  being,  that  you  were 
conftrained  to  mention  it.  For  furely  a  man  could  not 
ruve  written  90  pages  on,  and  in  vindication^,  infant 
fprinkling,  and  then  confefs  that  it  were  a  fcurce  of  cyij 
fcarcely  exceeded  by  any  other  if  he  were  net  constrain- 
ed to.  In  the  91ft  page,  you  obferve  that  "  While  we 
nepleca  our  duty  to  our  baptifed  children,  we  help  the; 
caufe  of  infidelity  and  wound  Chrift  in  the  tendered 
part.  Whereas,  if  in  this  thing,  we  fhould  be  faithful, 
as  we  have  covenanted,  our  children  would  have  a  priv- 
ilege, which  at  once  would  be  perceived  vaftly  fuperior 
to  that  of  thofc  whofe  patents  deny  to  them  the  orcli- 
dinance,  and  that  fublequer.t  training  refulting  from 
covenant  obligation" 

That  we  have  many  and  repeated  duties  to  do,  irj 
training  our  children  up  in  the  nurture  and  admoni- 
tion of  the  Lord,  is  a  great  and  important  truth.  But 
if  there  is  any  thing  in  infant  fprinkling  efllntial  to  this 
duty,  the  effecls  of  which  might  be  feen,  if  the  parents 
were  faithful,  what  a  pity  it  is  that  no  one  parent  is  dif- 
pofed  to  give  us  an  example  in  this  cafe  ?  For  I  confefs, 
if  the  world  of  mankind  in  general  can  behold  any  pref- 
erence in  children  that  have  been  fpnnkled,  above  and 
beyond  thofe  who  have  not  been,  they  have  better  eyes 
than  I  have  ever  yet  had.  And  if  there  is  not  any  vifi- 
ble  preference,  is  it  likely  there  is  any  internal  ?  And  if 
all  this  great  advantage  in  infant  fprinkling  fo  much 
contended  for,  has  been  for  this  many  year6  and  in  thofc 
H 


$6 

numberlefs  cafes  wholly  loft,  for  the  want  of  faithful 
parents,  fo  that  not  one  fingle  example  is  to  be  found, 
what  account  muft  fuch  parents  have  to  give  ?  More- 
over if  thefe  things  be  true,  it  reduces  fuch  parents  that 
make  their  great  boaft of  tiainiug  their  children  for  God, 
not  only  on  a  level,  but  vaflly  below  thofe  chriftian 
parents  that  make  no  fuch  boaft.  For  furcly,  if  thofe 
fo!emi  yet  awful  promifes,  made  by  parents  when  their 
children  are  fprinkled,are  never  afterwards  regarded  -,  it 
would  have  been  a  far  lets  evil  not  to  have  made  fuch 
promifes. 

I  (hall  now  offer  a  Few  things  on  your  12th  fee.  which 
you  entitle,  «  Abufe  of  infant  baptifm  considered." 
rage  91.  It  is  my  candid  opinion,  that  infant  baptifm 
was  never  half  fo  badly  abufed  as  thofe  who  pra&ife  it 
abufe  themfelvcs  by  pracTiting  fo  u '.warrantable  a  pre- 
iumption.  In  the  92^  page,  concerning  the  abufe  cf 
infant  baptifm,  that  "  This  has  been  done  in  two  ways* 
by  making  too  much  and  too  little  of  the  ordinance." 
That  infant  baptifm  is  made  too  much  of,  I  mall  not 
difpute  :  For  the  moment  that  it  is  admitted  as  on  ortU- 
nance  in  the  houfe  of  God  it  is  made  too  much  of  The 
reafens  are,  that  there  is  not  one  claufe  of  the  bible  in 
favor  of  it,  and  it  is  evident  that  you  have  not  produced 
one  that  is  to  the  cafe  inhand,notwithftandirg  your  bare 
aifcrtion  in  the  fame  page,  "  No  truth  in  the  whole  bible 
is  plainer  than  this."  If  your  bare  afTertion  could  be  ad- 
mitted as  witnefs  in  favor  of  infant  fprinkiing,  infant 
fp* inkiing  would  have  been  at  once  proved.  For  you 
often  enough  afiert  it,  hut  have  net,  and  cannot  bring 
f'-ip?ure  where  it  is  never  io  much  as  once  named  in 
the  whole  werdofGod.  And  hence  fuch  affcrtions 
cannot  bear  weight  in  the  minds  of  the  candid.  But 
that  infant  fprbk'ing  is  ever  made  too  little  of,  I  think 
car.  hardly  be  pofliole ;  except  it  be  when  it  is  counted 
a  lefs  evil  than  it  really  iR,  for  that  it  is  an  evil  of  itfelf, 
there  can  be  no  doubt ;  not  only  an  evil,  but  a  great  e- 
Vi!  ;  one  among  the  firft  rank.  This  muft  be  granted 
until  there  is  plain,  pofitive  authority  fox  its  practice  id 


*7 

the  word,  for  perverting  the  ordinances  of  God's  honfe, 
by  fubftituting  a    fome thing  in    its  (lead,    which  is  not 
the  ordinance  itfelf,  cannot  be  a  fmail  crime.     This  far- 
ther appears  from  another  confideration,  which  is,  that 
it  is  the  direct  way  to  make  hypocrites,  and  perhaps  the 
mod  general   one    la   the  world.     When    children  are 
fprinkled  in  infancy,  and  as  foon  as  they  are  come*to  years 
of  underftanding,  informed,  that  they  are   church  mem- 
bers, page  32,  and  if  their  parents  do  their  duty  towardo 
them  that  tneir  falvation  is  infallible,  page  102  ;  and  alfo 
if  they  do  not  keep  their  place  in  the  church,  they  roult 
be  excluded,  and  when    excluded    they  muft  not  be  ai- 
lowed  to  eat  a  common  meal  of  victuals  i  neither  (hake 
hands,  nor  when  it  can    conveniently  be   avoided  be  in 
the  company  of  thefe  that  are  members  of  the  chuich. 
If    this  is  not  calculated  to  promote  hypocrify  I  am  ig- 
norant of  Satan's  devices.  Your  13th  fee.  which  you  en- 
title, infant  baptifm  under  the  gofpel  difpenfation  tfftn- 
tial  to  keeping  covenant  with  God,  (page  96)  is  in  my 
opinion  a  mere  tautology  or  repetition  of  your  former  ar- 
guments *,  for  which  reafon   I  (hall  pafs  it  over  without 
many  remarks  on  it.     In  the  97th  page  you  fay*  "  As 
Abraham  would  have  been  a  covenant  breaker,  if  he  had 
refufed  to  circurncife  the  males  of  his  family  ;  fo  chrif- 
tians  are  covenant  breakers  who  refufe  baptifm  to  their 
infant  (c^-d.  And  this  on  the  ground  that  circumcilion  & 
baptifm  are  feals  of  the  fame   covenant  under   different 
dilpenfations.     This   confequence    is   unavoidable,  un» 
lefs  we    deny  what  has    been  abundantly   proved,  that 
baptifm  is  a  fealcf  the  fame  covenant  as  circumcifion." 

I  would  here  juft  note,  that  the  premifes  from  which 
you  draw  this  inference,  and  (ay  that  it  has  been  abun- 
dantly proved,  has  been  heretofore  examined  and  pro- 
ved that  the  witnefs  you  advanced  did  not  fpeak  to 
the  cafe  in  hand  v  of  courfe  your  inferences  cannot gk 
admitted.  I  would  requeft  the  reader  to  examine  for 
himfelf,  your  arguments  in  which  you  fay,  it  has  been 
abundantly  proved,. and  mine  in  which  they  are  c'lfpro- 


vcd,  then  weigh  both  by  the  word  of  God  ;  and  draw  a 
conclufion  for  himfelf,  tha*  he  will  be  willing  to  meet 
at  the  bar  of  God.  Where  all  will  be  expofed  before 
the  afTembled  univerfe,  and  juflified  or  condemned,  aa 
the  righteous  judge  fhaii  impartially  determine. 

I  (hill  now  briefly  notice  your  14th  feclion,  which 
yow  entitle,  «  The  promife  of  God  to  covenant  faithful- 
uefs."  page  99.  Your  firft  (latement  under  this  head  is, 
<5  by  covenant  faithfulnefs,  is  to  be  underftood  a  belief 
in  God's  holy  covenant,  and  a  faithful  performance  of 
fhe  ditties  it  requires.  We  ffiiil  not  be  covenant-keep- 
ers beyond  the  extent  of  our  belief  in  fuch  coven3nt. 
God's  covenant  makes  the  falvation  of  every  believer 
fate,  and  there  *re  abfolute  prpmifes  from  God  to  be- 
Ifetf'irrg  parents  who  are  fauhfulin  his  covenant,  which 
\tend  further,  than  to  their  own  perfonal  welfare.  The 
prbmiTe  of  God  to  thofe  parents  who  keep  his  holy  cov- 
rna'nt,  is  to  their  children  as  well  as  to  thcmfelves." 

Ir  is  here  highly  nccefFary  to  underfcand,  what  cove- 
nant it  is  that  iecures  the  happinefs  of  God's  people.    I 
h:\vc  heretofore  fhown  from  the  written  word  of  God  ; 
-;}.u  the  covenant  which  fecures  the  falvation  of  God's 
children  •,  is  the  covenant  made  between  Father  and  Son 
trl  the  council  of  God's  own  will,  which  mortals  had  no 
Hand  in  making}  none  in  keeping,  and  cannot  have  any 
y ii  broking.     The  Father  was  the   party  contractor  on 
heaven's  part  ;  and  hence  he  would  fee  that  juftice  was 
be  b~ioved  Son  was  the   party  contractor  on 
r-»ai»*3  behalf  5  and  would   fulfil:  And  hence  he   faith, 
*  i  hivs  froifhed    the  work  thou  gavefl  me  to  do.'     He 
had  the  promife  that  he  mould  fee  of  the  travail  of 
!,  and  be  fatisfifd.     And  hence  it  is  faid,  *  I  have 
made  a  covenant  with  my  chofen.'   Pf.  Ixxxix.  3.    <  And 
council  of  peace  (hall  be  between  them  both.  Zech. 
vr.  1  y.     Thefe  fcripLures  united  with  many  others,  give 
Us  an    account  of   the  covenant    on  which  depends  the 
faUaticki   of   God's   people.     Moreover  that   God  has 


9§ 

made  any  promlfes,  to  unbelieving  children   canntt  be* 
proved   from  the  written  word  of  God.     And  if  there, 
were  any  they  muft  neceffarily  clafh  with  other  parts  of 
divine  truth  ;  fof  <  he  that  believeth  not,  is  condemned 
already,  and  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  hinV  and  no  ex- 
ception is  made  whether  his  father  be  a  believer  ox  an 
infidel.     You  have  done  in  this  fe&ion  as  you  have  done 
by  many   others;-  That  is,  to  quote  a  number  of  £cr%>- 
tures  that  are  by  no    means  to  the   cafe  in  hand.     The 
firft  you  touch  upon  is,  what  is  faid   concerning    Abra- 
ham and  his  children,,  which    fcriptures  I    have  hereto- 
fore explained  in  a  degree,  and  in  page    too  you  bring 
up  what   is  fa  id  in  the  2d   commandment,    concerning 
vifiting  the  children  down  to  the  3-d  and  4th  generation  ; 
which  the  prophet  Ezekiel  has  fhown    was  only  appli- 
cable to  the    nation  of   Ifrael  $    as  may  be  feen    by  his 
comment  on  the  fub}e£h  Ezekiel  xviii.  2,  3,  4.  *  What 
mean  ye,  that  ye    ufe  this  proverb  concerning  the  Land 
of  ISRAEL,   fayingrthe  fathers  have  eaten  four  grapes, 
and  the  children's  teeth  are  fet  on  edge  ?  As  I  live  faith 
the  Lord  God,  ye  (hall  not  have   occafion   any  more  to 
ufe  this  proverb  in  Ifrael.     Behold,   all    fouls  are  minei 
as  the  foul  of  the  father,  fo  alfo    the  foul  of   the  fon  is 
mine  :  the  foul  that  finneth,  it  Ihall  die.     Not  that  this 
proves  as*  the  Arminian  fays,  that  the  original  fin  is  dor>2 
away,  fo  that  men  come  into  the  world  holy.     For  nei- 
ther the  threatning  or  the  removal  of  it  was  ever  appli- 
cable only  to  the  nation  of  the  Jews :  Of  courfe,  to  bring 
up  the  fubject  as  you  have  here,   is    blending   fcripture 
unrighteoufly.     The  fame   may  be  faid    of  fome  of  the 
pafluges  you  have  quoted^  in  the   101  ft-  page,  and  often 
where  the  feed  of  the  righteous  is  fpoken  of,    referring 
immediately  to    Chrift  and  his  feed,  you  have  brought 
forward  to  prove  a  faying  that  has  no  foundation  in  the 
.bible  ;  that  is,,  that  there  are  promifes  made  to  believing 
parents,  equally  referring  to  their  children.  In  your  102  1 
page  you  fay,  "  If  parents  give  up  their  children  to  God, 
placing  the  feal  of  the  covenant  on  them,  and  train  then*. 

H.  2 


for  him  as  Abraham,  did,  their  falvation  becomes  infal- 
lible." 

This  flatement  has  not  fo  much  as  the  color  of  truth 
for  its  fupport,  which  I  will  prove  before  I  leave  it.  If 
it  were  truth,  it  mult  be  that  all  Abraham's  children  are 
actually  faved.  For  you  tell  us  if  parents  train  their 
children  as  Abraham  did,  their  falvation  becomes  infal- 
lible. Mud  it  not  undeniably  follow  that  the  falvation 
of  Abraham's  children  was  infallible  ?  For  you  do  not 
require  them  to  do  better  than  Abraham  did,  but  only, 
Ay  Abraham  did.  "We  will  now  enquire  whether  the  fal- 
vation of  Abraham's  children  was  infallible  or  not  ?  «  For 
it  is  written,  that  Abraham  had  two  fons  ;  the  one  by 
a  bond  maid,  the  other  by  a  free  woman.  Neverthelefs, 
what  faith  the  fcripture  ?  Call  out  the  bond  woman  and 
her  fon  :  for  the  the  fon  of  the  bond  woman  (hall  not 
be  heir  with  the  fon  of  the  free  woman.'  Gal.  iv.  22,  30* 
Moreover,  if  your  afFertion  were  truth,  what  a  happy 
filiation  muft  all  the  human  family  be  in  that  have  liv- 
ed fmce  the  flood  ?  A9  Noah  was  a  man  of  God,  and 
for  ought  that  we  can  determine,  as  good  a  man  as  A- 
braham  ;  and  if  your  plan  would  have  born  in  his  cafe, 
why  not  in  his  children's  children  down  to  the  end  of 
thz  world  ?  but  inconteftibie  evidence  proves  the  reverfe. 

I  fhall  now  notice  fome  few  cf  your  awful  fayings 
contained  in  your  15th  Sec.  which  you  entitle,  <  The 
children  cf  God's  viiible  covenant  people  how  to  be 
considered  both  before  and  after  their  baptifm,3  page  105-. 
In  the  106  pace  you  have  quoted  1  Cor.  vii.  14,  in 
which  \:  is  written,  «  For  the,  unbelieving  hufband  is 
fan£lt6ed  by  the  wife,  and  the  unbelieving  wife  is  fanc- 
tified  by  the  believing  hufnand  :  Elfe  were  your  chil- 
hren  unclean,  but  now  are  they  holy.'  In  the  fame  page 
you  alfc,  *«  And  what  does  this  import,  except  ir  be, 
that  trrey,  to  all  intents  and  purpofes  are  in  covenant  vi- 
pbJyrin  the  fenfe   in  which    the   believing    parent  is  in 


9i 

covenant  vifibly,  and  alfoin  cafe  the  believing  parent 
fhould  prove  a  covenant  keeper  as  did   Abraham,   fuch 
children  thro*   grace,  (hall   be    faved  everlaitingly  with 
their  believing  parent.     This  is  the  evident  fenfe  of  the- 
apoftle." 

You  ftate  the  query  what  this  text  means  if  it  does 
not  mean  what  you  fay  it  does.  With  divine  aiTiftance 
I  will  endeavor  to  anlwer.  It  will  be  remembered,  that 
many  of  the  brethren  at  Corinth  were  Jews  before  con- 
verted to  the  Chriftian  faith.  Many  of  them  were  yet 
tenacious  concerning  their  law  ceremonies,  when  their 
zeal  was  low  in  the  things  of  the  gofpel.  It  will  alfo 
be  remembered,  that  it  was  contrary  to  the  laws  of  the 
Jews  for  one  of  them  tomarry  withone  of  another  nation  i 
And  if  they  did,  their  children  were  counted  unclean  5 
that  is  illegitimate,  or  baftards.  For  which  crime,  the 
man  was  to  put  away  his  wife;  or  they  were  to  be  caft  out. 
or  Honed  to  death.  Thefe  young  difciples  at  Cor- 
inth, being  imperfcclly  taught  in  the  difciplin-c  of  the 
gofpel  church ;  and  well  inftrudted  in  the  Jewifh 
ceremonies,  fuppofed  that  if  any  one  became  converted 
and  his  wife  did  not,  that  they  nauft  treat  the  unbeliev- 
ing wife  as  the  ftrange  wife  under  the  law  was  to  be 
treated.  But  being  not  all  of  this  opinion,  there  arofe 
a  difpute  among  them,  for  which  caufe,  they  wrote  to 
the  apoftle  Paul  to  get  his  decifion.  The  apoftle  in 
anfwer,  takes  up  the  matter  and  (hows  them  the  differ- 
ence there  were  in  the  two  difpenfations:  And  to  inforce 
it  upon  their  minds,  adopts  the  arguments  contained  in 
this  chapter ;  from  which  it  may  be  feen  in  what  fenfe 
they  were  holy  :  that  is,  in  a  law  fenfe,  legitimate  chil- 
dren, not  baftards  but  fons.  Thefe  fayings  are  inforced 
by  the  firth  verfe  of  the  chapter,  which  is,  '  Now,  con- 
cerning the  things  whereof  ye  wrote  unto  ir,e/  From 
which  it  is  plain,  they  had  wrote  to  him  on  the  fubjecl 
now  before  us,  as  he  goes  on  and  immediately  takes  the 
fubjedl  upr 


92 

But  fir,  the  conftruction  you  have  put  upon  the  text, 
is  the  very  mod  contemptible  kind  of  Arminianifm. 
for  the  profeffed  Arminian  fays,  that  children  arc  bom 
into  the  world  holy,  on  the  acconnt  of  what  Chrift  has 
done  by  his  death  •,  which  thus  far  would  afcribe  the 
glory  to  him.  But  your  intimation  is,  that  they  are 
born  holy,  becaufe  their  parents  believe,  and  not  only 
holy  in  a  law  fenfe  ;  but  holy  to  that  degree,  that  if 
their  parents  prove  covenant  keepers  that  ihey  will  tver- 
laftingly  be  faved  though  grace.  Thejuft  inference  is, 
that  if  this  were  truth,  the  falvation  of  the  children  muft 
depend  on  the  fidelity  of  their  parents  y  tut  the  apoftle 
teaches  that  there  is  no  other  way  nor  name  given 
whereby  ye  can  be  faved  though  the  Lord  Jefus  Chrift.. 

I  fhall  notice  one  point  more  rn  this  fe£tion  con- 
tained in  page  108,  which  is  your  comment  on  the 
little  children  that  were  brought  to  Chrift.  You  at 
firft  appear  to  intimate  here,  that  the  kingdom  of  heav- 
en fpoken  of  there,  was- the  kingdom  of  heaven  in  this 
world  ;  that  i3  the  church  of  God..  Put  left  this  would 
not  bear,  you  obferve  that  if  it  meant  the  kingdom  of 
glory,  they  muft  certainly  be  frt  for  baptifm.  I  would 
here  note,  that  it  is  utterly  improbable  that  Chrift  had 
the  leaft  reference  to  the  church  in  this  world,  when  he 
lays,  *  Suffer  little  children  to  come  unto  me,  and  for- 
bid them  not,  for  of  fuch  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.'  The 
difciples  were  the  people  that  forbid  it  ;  and  would  they 
have  done  it  had  they  been  accuftomed  to  be  in  a  church 
where  little  children  were  the  members  ?  Moreover, 
thefe  little  children  were  undoubtedly  converted,  this 
appears  from  two  confiderations  the  firft  is,  Chrift  bleft 
them.  The  fecond  is,  that  Chrift  tells  the  people  that 
except  they  be  converted  and  become  as  little  children, 
andinanotherplace  as  this  little  child, thattheycould  in  no 
cafe  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  From  which  it  is 
plain  that  they  were  converted^,  for  if  they  were  not  con- 
verted then  thofe  that  were  converted  would  not  be  like 
them  5  the  one  being  converted  and  the  other  not.  But 


93 

fhe  main  thing  that  was  mod  principally  referred  to  here 
is,  the  fimilarity  there  is  between  a  little  child  &  a  young 
convert.  The  apoftle  faith,  when  I  was  a  child,  I  aSed 
as  a  child,  but  when  I  became  a  man  I  put  away  childifn 
things.  John  in  his  epiftle  fpeaks  of  children,  when 
writing  to  fuch  as  were  capable  of  receiving  iniiruclien, 
and  of  overcoming  the  world— Chrift  called  his  difci- 
ples  children. 

Your  1 6th  and  lad  feclion  you  entitle  M  The  cosfe- 
quence  of  denying  infant  baptifm  conndered."  p3ge  1 10, 
In  your  I  I  ith  page  you  fay  «*  If  therefore  infant  baptifm 
is  to  be  given  over  as  loft  becaufe  it  has  for  its  fupport 
neither  pofitive  precept  nor  example,  we  may  without 
difficulty  fee  what  ether  fentiments  muft  go  with  it  in 
company  and  in  the  fame  general  facrificc." 

It  is  a  matter  of  not  a  little  furprize,  co  follow  your 
work  through  1 1 1  pages  •,  in  which  you  have  been  en-- 
cieavoring  to  fupport  infant  bap;ifm,  in  which  you  have 
brought  forward  a  variety  of  fcriptures,  in  which  you 
would  feign  make  your  reader  believe  were  to  the  cafe 
in  debate,  and  even  fay  in  a  former  fe&ion  that  no  one 
duty  in  the  whole  bible  was  plainer,  and  now  tacitly 
own,  that  there  h  no  pofitive  precept  or  example  for 
it.  The  candid  reader  will  notice  here,  that  though  you 
brought  a  number  of  fcriptures  in  purfung  your  trca- 
life,  that  you  were  the  mean  while  con  fetalis  t  J » a  t  they 
did  not  fpeak  to  the  cziz  in  debate,  however  to  make 
amends  for  this  ycu  have  brought  up  a  number  of  fenti- 
ments which  you  intimate  muf:  fail  ;  if  infant  baptifm 
cannot  be  admitted  without  either  precept  or  example. 
Is  not  this  a  bad  kind  of  reafoning  ?  If  men  have  adop- 
ted one  unrighteous  fenticiect,  (hall  they  to  atone  for  ir, 
adopt  another:  Would  not  this  be  adding  f;n  to  fin? 
Moreover,  fome  of  the  fentiments  yo«  mention,  and 
fay  rnufi:  fall  with  infant  fprinkling,  I  (hall  endeavor  to 
make  it  appear  will  live,  when  iafan:  fprinkling  is  both 
dead  and  buried, 


94 

In  the  1 1 2th  page,  you  fay,  "  If  wc  rejecT  infant  bap* 
tifm,  we  mult  for  the  fame  reafons  rej,  ct  females  horn 
communion  at  the  Lord's  tabic."  Sir,  are  there  no  bet- 
ter authority  for  femaie  communion,  than  thr»e  are  for 
infant  baptifm  ?  Chrift  faith  exprefsly  to  his  followers 
(concerning  communion,)  <  This  do  in  rcmemorance  of 
me.'  Which  was  a  pofitive  command  to  all  hL  follow- 
ers, and  is  an  undeniable  fact,  that  women  made  a  part 
of  his  followers.  For  they  were  baptised  both  men  and 
women.  Women  alfo  followed  him  to  his  crucifixion, 
and  came  eaily  in  the  morning  to  his  fepulchre. 

Your  cavil  here  feems  principally  to  be  becaufe  there 
is  no  exprefs  mention  tnat  females  tame  to  the  commu- 
nion. 1  think  it  may  be  eafily  (hown,  that  ixi  every  cafe 
where  the  males  of  Chrift's  followers  aTe  commanded 
to  commune  *,  that  it  equally  implies  the  females.  In 
this  part  you  will  find  that  the  woman  is  included  in  the 
man  :  This  may  be  fecn  by  Eve  haviog  an  exiftence  ia 
Adam  before  (he  was  extracted  from  him.  It  is  fecn  al- 
fo in  John  iii.  3 — *  Except  a  man.  be  born  againj  he 
cannot  fee  the  kingdom  cf  God  •/  implying  both  men 
and  women,  unlefs  it  can  be  proved,  that  women  do 
pot  need  regeneration,  in  order  to  be  faved.  It  is  ftiil 
more  clearly  Ceenin  what  is  repeatedly  faid  of  our  Sav- 
iour, wherein  he  is  called  the  Son  of  MAN.;,  when  no 
man  was  inftrumentaJJy  the  caufe  of  his  birth,  only  that 
as  the  Apoftle  fays,  *  He  was  raade  cf  a  woman/ 

In  page  114,  you  fay  again,  <c  The  denial  of  infant 
baptifm  implies  aifo  the  der.ial  of  the  Chriliian  fabbath 
as  holy  time."  Is  this  the  principle  why  fo  many  of 
your  brethren  ha7e  reproached  the  Baptifts,  and  loaded 
them  with  infamy,  by  faying,  that  the  Baptilts  did  not 
hold  to  keeping  the  Sabbath  ?  This,  Sir,  I  will  not 
charge  upon  yourfelf  as  an  individual,  fori  know  not  as 
youhave  done  it ;  but  it  has  been  prevalent  among  fome 
of  your  brethren  ;  and  if  it  hts  not  been  brought  up  in 


9i 

your  Prefbytery  as  a  barrier  againft  Baptiit  influence,  I 
have  been  wrongly  informed,  and  that  by  people  belong- 
ing to  the  Prtfbytery,  who  declared  they  were  ear  wit- 
defies.  I  cannot  be  bail  for  all  the  people  bearing  the 
Baptift  name  ;  but  this  much  I  can  fay,  that  I  am  not  ac- 
quainted with  any  of  the  Baptifts  with  whom  we  are  in 
fellowfhip,  but  what  hold  it  a  duty  to  pay  a  pious  ob- 
fervance  to  the  firft  day  of  the  week,  or  the  Lord's  day, 
or  Chriftian  fahbath.  And  I  alfo  think  that  I  can  prove 
from  the  word  of  God,  that  the  firft  Baptifts  we  have 
account  of  as  a  body  of  people,  made  it  their  prac- 
ti  e,  and  enjoined  it  as  a  duty  on  their  adherents.  The 
people  I  here  have  reference  to,  is  Jefus  Chrift,  his  fore* 
runner  and  followers  :  Whofe  practice,  in  the  pious  ob« 
fer vance  of  the  firft  day  of  the  we.k,  is  repeatedly  re- 
eon  rd  in  lie  New  Tcitament.  They  met  together  on 
the  firft  cay  cf  the  week,  and  broke  bread,  fpake 
the  wore,  ...yed  unJ  fang  praile6  :  See  Acls  xx.  7. —  1 
Toi.  xvn  2. —  A6ls  xvi.  13 — with  many  other  paiTiges 
In  ihe  Nj\v  Tcitament.  it  is  then,  pofltiv  ly  enjoined 
b-y  oui  JLprd  u  follow  him — and  the  apoftles  renew 
tht  command  ly  enjoining  it  as  a  dufy  to  withdraw 
from  cv-ry  broth  ?i  that  ws  k-th  diforderly  and  not  «ic- 
cordiu^  to  th-r'ir  tra  ition.  Of  ourfe,  we  have  for  the 
DOferVance  of  trie  Chiftian  fabbath  :  Firft,  the  example 
o  Ch  iit  an  J  ihe  ap  Miles.  Secondly,  an  txprefs  com- 
manct  t0  follow  th.-r  example.  An  had  you  pro  'u^d 
as  .good  a  -warrant  iu  infant  fprinkting,  I  would  :.  ve 
never  op-poled  it,  but  gladly  embraced  it,  as  an  in- 
ftitu  i on  from  heaver,  ;  out  fin*:e  you  have  not,  you  are 
unfair  and  unfciiptuial  to  blend  them  together 

Io  your  1151b  page  you  fay, «  The  inftitution  of  the 
fiobath  is  made  a  (-omtituent  part  of  the  moral  law."  I 
think  f}r»  that  this  is  it  a  little  incorrect  ;  If  it  is  not,  we 
are  all  guilty  of  a  couftant  breach  of  the  chriftian  fahbath  • 
f  the  fabbath  mentioned  in  the  fourth  commandment 
io  rue  lev  nth  cfay  of  the  week,  and  if  that  was  mcrai 
i*w  it  has  nevcj  been  repealed,  but  {tanci6  binding  yet 


?6 

as  much  on  us  as  it  did  on  the  nation  of  the  Jews — for 
moral  law  is  that  eternal  rule  of  right ;  that  took  its 
rife  in  the  fcale  of  beings  and  runs  through  the  word  of 
God  like  a  golden  cord,  enjoining  on  all  rational  beings 
that  wjiich  is  right  of  itfelf,  both  towards  God  and  man  ; 
which  inftead  of  being  done  away  by  Chrift  was  perfectly 
obferved  and  fulfilled,  and  ft  ill  remains  binding  on  ait 
rational  beings,  for  it  requires  nothing  unreafonable  of 
itfelf.  Of  courfe,  if  the  feventh  day  that  the  Jews  were 
commanded  to  keep  as  the  fabbath,  was  a  coi-ftituent 
part  of  the  moral  law,  that  fame  feventh  day  is  ftill  bin- 
ding, and  cannot  lawfully  be  difpenfed  with.  But  if  the 
Jswifh  fabbath  was  a  preceptive  command  from  God  to 
the  nation  of  the  Jews  in  particular  ;  then  J  fus  Chrift, 
who  was  Lord  even  of  the  fabbath,  couid,  under  the  gof- 
pel  difpenfation  teach  his  difciples  to  obfrwe  the  firft 
day  of  the  week,  and  the  obligation  be  equally  binding. 

In  the  1 16th  page  you  fay,  «  By  denying  infant  bap- 
tifm  we  muft  deny  houfhold  baptifm,  For  houfholcl 
baptifm  we  have  a  «  thus  faith  the  Led.'  It  is  reveal- 
ed, The  Jailor,  Lyriia  and  Stephanas  were  baptifed  with 
their  families. "  And  in  the  fame  p*ge  5  "  There  is  as 
great  evidence  that  infants  belonged  to  thefe  families, 
as  that  there  were  perfons  belonging  to  them  of  any 
age." 

This  Iafl  faying  is  ro  remote  from  the  word  of  God, 
and  the  cleared  dictates  of  common  information,  that  it 
will  ferve  to  (how  the  neceflity  of  rejecting  houfhoid  bap- 
tifm as  fpoken  of  in  the  bible,  in  order  to  ftjt&  infant 
fprinkling  and  the  fame  preferve  confiftency. 

In  the  1 17th  page  you  obferve  further  5  "  If  we  deny 
infant  baptifm,  and  rmke  it  a  breaking  point  in  com- 
munion as  fome  do,  we  muft  own, tint  all  thofc  minifters 
and  churches,  who  defend  and  pra&ife  infant  baptifm, 
are  in  fact  no  minifters  and  churches,  and  that  they  are 
not  owned  by  Chrift  as  fuch. 


in  the  remaining  part  of  this  and  the  following  pA- 
ges  you  mention  that  Luther,  Mela..cmhon  and  Calvin 
and  many  others  as  bold  reformers,  who  pradtiled  in- 
fant fpriukling.  Is  the  imperfection  and  error  of  pood 
men  one  of  the  laft  witileffes  to  offer  in  favor  of  infant 
fprinkling  f  This  is  being  driven  to  (traits  in  very  deed.  I 
cannot  forbear  mentioning  here  that  the  Arnunians  in 
their  plea  for  falling  from  grace  often  bring  up  David's 
adultery  and  flaying  Uriah,  to  confirm  their  argument ': 
Importing  that  David  could  not  have  been  a  child  of 
God,  when  he  commited  thofe  crimes.  And  as  he  was 
before,  and  afterwards,  he  mud  have  fallen  from  grace. 
If  I  could  believe  that  their  argument  was  bible  ;  I 
would  admit  yours  to  be  logic  ;  but  I  can  fee  neither 
truth  in  theirs,  nor  reafon  in  yours.  For  if  it  was  pof- 
fible  for  David  to  be  a  man  after  God's  own  heart,  and 
yet  iuffered  to  fall  into  fuch  grof>  wickednefs  5  I  know- 
not  the  impoiubility  of  Lulher,  Calvin  and  others  being 
men  of  God,  and  yet  imperfect  enough  in  this  world 
to  fprinkle  children,  and  call  it  baptifm,  unlefs  it  is  a 
greater  fin  than  adultery  and  murder. 

In  the  1 19th  page  you  fay,  (l  Now  is  any  truth 
more  clearer  to  be  feen,  that  the  law  enjoining  infant 
memberfhip  has  never  been  difaunulled  by  God." 
I  would  hert -remind  the  reader  that  I  have  heretofore 
fhown  from  the  word  cf  God,  that  the  JewiGi  church 
and  gofpel  church  were  two  diilin£l  churches  ;  and  that 
in  the  gofpel  church  there  n  ver  was  any  fuch  law  5 
conftquuently  needs  no  repealing.  And  if  the  reader 
be  defirous  to  know  what  has  become  of  the  enjoining 
infant  memberfhip  in  the  jewifh  i  It  is  nailed  to  the 
crofs  of  our  dear  Redeemer,  where  it  will  never  be  re- 
inforced on  the  difcipies  of  Tefus  Ghrift.  Se*;,Col.  ii. 
13,  14.  «  And  you  being  dead  in  your  fins,  and  the  un- 
circumcifion  of  your  fLfli,  hath  he  quickened  togv-ther 
with  him,  having  forgiven  you  all  trefpaflee,  blotting 
out  the  hand  writing  of  ORDINANCES  that  was  a- 
gainft  us,  which  was  contrary  to  us,  and  took  it  out  of 
I 


9S 

the  way,  nailing  it  to  his  crofs  :'  And  Verfcs  20,  ai, 
22.  «  Wherefore  if  ye  be  dead  with  Chrift  from  ttoc 
rudiments  of  the  world,  why  as  though  living  in  the 
world,  are  ye  fubjeft  to  ordinances  (touch  not,  taftc  not, 
handle  not  j  which  all  are  to  periih  with  the  ufing,) 
after  the  commandments  and  do&tine  of  men  ?"  I  have 
already  gone  much  further  than  I  intended  when  I 
commenced  writing ;  and  as  I  fee  nothing  in  the  re- 
maining part  of  your  book  that  I  count  erroneous  but 
what  I  have  already  noticed,  I  (hall  go  no  further  by 
way  of  reply;  but  clofe  by  faying,  that  as  "your  book 
treats  on  fprinkling.  It  has,in  my  opinion,  a  fprinkling  of 
important  truth,  furrounded  with  the  moil:  awful  fight  of 
Arminianifm  that  I  ever  remember  reading  info  few  pages. 
Should  you  be  difpofed  to  take  the  liberty  that  I  have,  & 
make  your  reply  to  my  remarks,  you  are  at  full  liberty 
fo  to  do,  as  we  live  in  a  free  country,  where  the  lib- 
erty of  the  prefs  is  granted,  the  rights  of  conferences 
unalienable,  and  the  caufe  of  truth  remaining  for  open 
enquiry  and  free  debate.  And  if  I  have  gone  afide 
from  truth  I  would  deem  it  a  favor  to  be  corrected  ;  and 
as  it  is  certain  that  both  cannot  be  right  it  becomes  us 
to  examine  the  fubje&s  and  be  in  readinefs  to  meet 
them  at  the  tribunal  of  the  Great  God  :  To  which  tri- 
bunal t  wittingly  refer  the  decifion.  Being  confeious 
that  what  I  have  written  I  believe  to  be  the  truth,  and 
pofleffing  a  hope  in  the  meTcy  of  God,  that  that  part 
which  may  be  found  imperfeel,  will  be  forgiven  through 
a  dear  Redeemer.  With  refpett,  I  remain  yours,  m 
ial;hfulnefs3  truth  and  fconefty. 


Jfhall  add  a  few  fiiort  AddrcfTes  : 

Firft,  to  my  podobaptift  brethren  in  general,   efpe- 
cially  thofe  with  whom  I  have  a  particular  acquaotancej, 
many  of  whom, J  hope,  belong  to  the  family  of  God. 

Secondly*.  To  my  Baptift  brethren  in  general,  efp?- 
cially  thofc  with  whom  I  am  more  immediately  connect- 
ed in  church  relation. 

4 

Thirdly,  to  my  fellow  travellers  to  eternity  in  gener- 
al who  arc  yet  in  the  gall  of  bitternefs  and  bond  of  in* 
iquity. 

ADDRESS  I. 

To  my  psedobaptift  brethren  in  general,  efpeci<u'y 
thofe  with  whom  I  have  a  particular  acquaintance,  ma- 
ny of  whom,  I  hope,  belong  to  the  family  of  God. 

Dearly  Beloved, 

WHAT  reception  thefe  remarks  may  have  in  your 
minds  I  know  not,  neither  am  I  anxious  about  it  ^  fav- 
ing  I  lcng  to  fee  the  time  come  when  God's  people  {hall 
fee  eye  to  eye  ;  and  Zionrs  watchmen  lift  up  their  voi- 
ces together,  and  it  be  no  more  Lo,  here,  and  Lo,  there, 
but  all  know  him  from  the  leaffc  to  the  greateft.  Until 
then  how  does  it  become  us  to  behave  ourfelves  ?  Ought 
we  not  to  contend  earneflly  for  the  faith,  once  deliver- 
cd  to  the  faints  ?  If  io9  when  contending  with  eachoth- 
cr,.what  mould  be  our  object  but  apoftolic  da&rine  and 
apoftolic  practice  ?  I  am  furprifed  to  fee  fo  many  of  you 
trifle  with  the  ordinance  of  God's  houfe  \  neither  can  I 
believe,  that  you  on  this  account  reft  eafy,  but  fancy  for 
rayfelf,  that  you  are  called  to  many  ferious  reflection!, 
in  your  more  retired  moments.  (I  mean  fuch  of  you  as 
are  understanding  chriftians.)  And  while  yo«  through 
tbe  tradiion  of  your  fathers,  arc  difpofed  to  (bun  this 
crofe,  yotU  incur  the  chaining  rod  of  our  heavenlyFather, 


100 

There  are  united  reafons  for  this  opinion  :  The  finl  k9 
that  there  is  nothing  in  the  bible  foi  what  you  call  bap- 
tiftfi.    The  fjrcond  is,  the  promife  of  God  to  his  children, 
that  when  they  go   aftrsy  he  will  chaftife    them.     The 
third  is,  your  general  conduct  towards  thofe   who  can« 
not  in  conscience   fubmit    to   what   you   call    baptifm. 
With  the  baptifts   you  appear  to  be  intimate    until  this 
fubjecfr:  is  brought  to  view  ;  arid  when  this   is  touched 
upon,  you  then    plead  it    ia   nothing  efTenti-al  ;  and  iri 
the  next   place,    make    it  fo   effenfial  as  to   fhun    their 
company,  reject  their  correspondence,  and  refrain  from 
their  meetings  :  And  perhaps   the    fame  time,   cenfure 
the  baptiftg  becaufe  they  will  not    commune  with   you. 
Why  are  all  thefe  things  if  you  are  rooted  and  grounded 
in  the  truth  ?  If  fo,  the  baptist  cannot  hurt  you.     If  the 
baptifts  are  wrong,  you  are  not  obliged  to  embrace  their 
errors;     and- if  they  are   right,    why   would    you   thuti 
their  council  ?  If  you  were  net  confeious  that  ycu  were 
wrong,  would  you  be  fo  unwilling    to   have    your    plan 
examined?   The  bible  teaches  that  he  that  doeth  truth, 
cometh  to|rhe  light  \  that  his  deeds  may  be  made  mani- 
fed,  ihfit  they  are  wrought  in  God.    Moreover,  do  you 
reaiife  what  damage  you  are  doing  to  yourfelves  ;   &  the 
wound   you  bring  upon  (lie   caufe   you   prcfefs   to  love 
by  fueh  a  line  of  conduct  ?  Our  Saviour  faid  of  fome  of 
old  time,  that  they  rejt&ed  the  council    of  God  againfi 
themfclve?  ;   being    not  baptifed  of  John.     Should    the 
htiptiffcs  at  lad  prove  to  be  the  followers  of  a  meek  and 
lowly  Saviour  $  behold,  the  danger  of  (peaking  re proach- 
XUiiy  of  rhofe  that  believe  on    him.     He  faith,    it    were 
better  that  a    mihlTone  were  hanged  about  their   necks, 
and  they  drowned  in  the  depth  of  the  fea,  tbaq^to  offend 
one  of  thefe  little  ones  that  believe  in   me.     If  the    bap- 
tifb  depart  from  the  truth    in  either  principle  or    prac- 
tice, it  is  your  real  duty  as  much    as  theirs,  to  point  cut 
the  wrong  and  warn  them  of  the  danger ;  but  not  to  be- 
have in  the  mean  time  as  tho' you  rejoiced  at  if,  for  that 
is  ungodly,  whether  it  be  found  in  you  or  us  j  for  wrongs 


among  profeflors  are  wounding  to  the  general  caufe  ; 
let  it  be  found  in  what  denomination  it  may. 

Finally,  to  clofe  this  Addrefs,  I  fubmit  to  your  exam- 
ination, the  foregoing  remarks,  hoping  you  may  perufe 
them,  compare  them  with  thofe  they  are  an  anfwer  to, 
bring  them  to  the  light  of  divine  truth  ;  and  may  God 
affift  your  minds  to  form  fuch  a  conclufion  as  you  will  be 
willing  to  meet  at  his  bar  j  which  is  the  Hncere  prayer 
of  thine  to  ferve. 


ADDRESS  II; 

To  my  Baptift  brethren  in  general,  efpecially  thofe  with 
whom  I  ach  more  immediately  connected  in  church 
relation. 

Dear  Brethren, 

SINCE  we  are  fo  far  united  in  the  belief  of  the 
gofpel,  its  doctrines  and  ordinances  ,  how  does  it  be- 
come us  to  be  unremitting  in  its  practices,  fince  we 
are  fo  happily  united  in  our  belief  of  water  baptifm  ? 
May  we  learn  its  practical  ufe.  When  we  are  baptifed 
in  gofpel  order,  we  thereby  viGbly  declare  to  all  around 
us  that  we  are  dead  to  fin,  and  alive  to  God.  When 
the  names  of  the  facred  Trinity  aie  ufed  in  our  bnptifm, 
it  denotes  that  we  are  under  that  immediate  government, 
which  is  the  government  of  God's  houfe.  We.alfo  en- 
gage, before  God,  Sngels  and  men,  to  fotuke  ail  that 
lhall  let  or  hinder  \  and  follow  the  meek  and  lowly  Sav- 
iour through  good  and  evil  report.  To  daily  go  forth 
without  the  camp,  beartng  his  reproach.  We  alfo,  by 
fuch  profeCion  publicly  enlift  under  the  banner  of  our 
Lord  :  In  which  warfare,  we  aie  to  endure  hardship  as- 
[•cod  foidisrs  of  Jcfcs  Chrift.  The  enemy  to  be  en- 
countered in  this  warfare  are  the  united  powers  of  earth 
and  hell.  And  hence,  we  had  need  take  the  exhorta- 
tion of  :hz  Apoflle,  and  put  en  the  whole  armour  of 
■   2 


102 

God  ;  the  mean  while,  having  for  our  encourage- 
ment-, the  promife  of  the  great  Captain  of  our  falvation 
that  he  will  be  with  us  ;  that  he  will  deliver  us  out  of 
fix  troubles,  and  in  feven  he  will  not  forfake  us.  Let 
us  then  arife,  make  ourfelves  from  the  duft,  and  go 
forth  in  the  ftrength  of  the  mighty  God  of  Jacob  ;and 
fight  manfully  the  good  fight  of  faith.  Mortifying  the 
deeds  of  the  body,  refitting  the  temptation  of  the  devil, 
fhuning  the  bewitching  fnares  of  the  world,  refufing  its 
flattering,  and  fcoming  to  murmur  under  its  frowns, 
knowing  that  our  blefTed  Mafter  both  conquered  all 
thefe  enemies,  and  put  them  under  chains.  And  hence,, 
though  they  may  worry  the  children  of  God,  they  can- 
overcome  them.  Good  encouragement  for  the  foldiers 
of  Jefus  Chrift  •,  the  caufe  is  good,  the  Captain  is  glori- 
ous, his  foldiers  are  volunteers,  the  bounty  is  free 
grace,  the  equipage  the  whole  armor  of  God.  The  fer- 
vice  a  pleafure,  the  conqueft  is  fure,  the  crown  is  eter- 
nal and  unfading  glory  in  the  kingdom  of  our  Father,. 
"Where  the  rage  of  earth  and  hell,  will  he  heard  no 
more. 

<«  Then  ive*ll  march  up  the  heavenly  street) 
**  And  ground  cur  arms  at  Jefus'  feet" 

Having  thefe  promifes,  dearly  beloved,  lot  us  be  of 
good  courage  •,  let  us  witnefs  to  all  around  us,  that 
v/e  have  through  grace,  engaged  in  a  caufe  that  we 
are  not  afhamed  of.  If  called  to  pafs  through  forrows 
rememivr  they  are  fhort  ;  If  in  wearincfs,  that  there  is 
a  reft  remains  for  the  people  of  God  :  If  among  falfe 
brethren,  that  we  (hall  be  rid  of  them  when  we  get 
home  :  If  mourning,  our  unlikenefs  to  our  mafter, 
we  fhall  then  be  Chrift-like  ;  If  forrowing  on  the  ac~ 
count  of  our  difference  in  opinions,  that  we  (hall  then 
be  of  one  mind  :  Until  then,  may  we  quietly  hope,  and 
rntkntlv  wait  for  the  falvation  of  God. 


103 
ADDRESS  IIL 

To  my  fellow  travellers  to  eternity  in  general,  who  arc 
yet  in  the  gall  of  bitternefs,  and  bond  of  iniquity. 

Fellow-Mortals, 

Let  me  tell  you,  that  you  are  fwiftly  approaching 
the  bar  of  God,  and  the  time  of  your  arrival  will  foon 
commence.  And  what  a  fcene  will  this  unfold  to  you 
lhould  you  arrive  there  in  the  ftate  you  are  now  in  ?;  You 
are  now  an  enemy  of  God,  and  of  the  children  of  God. 
The  proof  of  thefe  aflertions  you  daily  make  yourfelves  : 
You  prove  you  are  enemies  to  God  by  difobeying  his 
commands  ;  for  they  that  love  him  will  keep  his  words. 
You  prove  yourfelves  enemies  to  God's  people  in  that 
you  defpife  and  fpeak  evil  of  them.  You  rejoice  at  their 
troubles  and  glory  when  they  are  wounded.  When  by 
falfe  brethren  they  are  brought  into  trouble  you  are 
glad,  hoping  that  they  are  a  houfe  divided  againft  itfelf 
that  cannot  (land.  But  let  me  tell  you.  that  amid  all 
the  Chriftian's  trials,  his  lot  is  a  happy  one  •,  while  your 
(late  is  awful,  inconceivably  awful,  and  beyond  defcrip^ 
tion  to  be  dreaded.  You  are  not  an  uninterefted  be- 
ing in  the  concerns  of  eternity.  You. are  alfo  a  foldier, 
but  your  caufe  is  a  bad  one  ;  your  captian  is  the  prince 
of  darknefs,  with  a  ready  heart  and  willing  mind,  have 
you  entered  his  fervice.  Your  bounty  is  a  flattering 
toy,  with  {tinging  gulit.  Your  equipage,  is  a  hard  heart, 
blind  eyes,  deaf  ears,  and  a  confcience  feared  with  a  hot 
iron.  Your  courage  is  the  rage  and  malice  of  hell. — 
Your  fervice  is  bondage  and  the  word  of  flavery.  The 
conqueft  you  will  not  obtain,  and  the  wages  is  eternal 
death.  O,  Gnner  }  What  a  pitiful  cafe  is  thine,  and  yet 
you  are  infenfible  of  it.  Remember,  thine  arm  is  not 
fufficient  to  contend  with  Jehovah.  Remember,  again  -9 
that  whilft  thou  art  laughing  at  the  children  of  God, 
and  faying,  aha,  aha,  fo  wuold  we  have  it,  that  art  fall- 
en :  Thou  art  utterly  fallen  into  remedilefs  woe&  ruin, 
Msaa  while,  the  faint  is  combating  his  paflage  through 


104 

this  unfriendly  world,  to  bis  Father's  houfe  :  He  ap- 
pears to  thee  an  unpleafant  fight  when  thou  paffcft  by 
him*  Well,  you  and  he  are  going  to  be  feparated  : — 
Yea,  as  diftant  as  heaven  and  hell  ;  and  how  will  he 
then  appear  to  you,  when  you  fhall  behold  him  as  the 
rich  man  did  Lazarus,  and  you  made  to  adopt  the  lan- 
guage of  the  poet : 

C(  Yonder  fits  my  Godly  neighbor  ; 

fi  Who  was  once  defpis'd  by  me  : 

«<  Now  he's  clad  in  dazzling  fplendo','% 

(i  Waiting  my  fad  doom  tn  fee, 

"  Farewell  neighbor  ;   Farewell  neighbor  z 

«  Difmal  gulph,  Vm  bound  for  thee." 

O,  finner,  remember,  whoever  thou  aTt,  that  art  an 
enemy  to  God,  that  thefe  awful  truths  will  one  day  roll 
like  peals  of  thunder,  and  like  meets  of  lightning,  and 
clothe  thy  naked  foul  in  one  eternal  ftorm.  O  repent, 
repent -a  the  word  of  God  commands  thee  to  repent  % 
and  in  the  name  of  my  Mailer,  I  would  ag^io  warn  thee 
to  repent,  or  expecl  to  met  thy  Judge,  thy  enemy,  ex- 
cept thou  repent.  And  may  Jtfus,  who  was  exalted  to 
give  repentance  and  remifnon  of  fins,  grant  thee  repent- 
ance, for  his  Name's  fake  \  which  is  the  prayer  of  thy 
well  wiftier,  for  jefus5  fake. 

THE  AUTHOR, 


The  following  Extracl  1  have  taken  from   Mr.   Daniel 
Merrill's  iuotk  verbatim  as  itjiands,  purely  for  the 
fatisfaclion  of  thofe  of  my  brethren  ivh*  are  not  generally 
favored  with  his  Booh 


A  MINIATURE  HISTORY 

OF    THE 

BAPTISTS, 


IF  may  be  pleafmg  to  fomeof my  readers  to  he  pre- 
ferred with  a  brief  account  of  the  Baprifts.  i  fhaii  ea- 
tract  this  account  from  the  writings  of  thofe  who 
were  not  of  the  Baptift  denomination,  but  rather  pre- 
judiced againft  them. 

Here  it  ni3y  be  obferved,  that  the  religions  feci",  cal- 
led Baptifts,  have  caufed  the  learned  world  more  per- 
plexity and  refearch  to  decipher  their  oiigin,  than  any. 
other  (t€t  of  Chriftians,  or,  perhaps,  than  all  others, 
*¥es,  this  tefearch  hath  baffled  all  their  erudition  in  an* 
cient  itory. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  ftx  the  period  when  one  feci  oi 
this  denomination  was  firfl  called  Petrohufians*  when  a- 
nother  was  known  by  the  name  of  Water'laridfaqs,  when 
a  third  waa  denominated  Mennonites,  £<c.  But  the 
difficulty  is  this,  to  afcertain  the  time,  place  and 
medium,  by  which  ChrihVs  difciples  were  led  to  adopt 
the  peculiar  fentimenr,  which  is  now  held  by  thofe  call- 
ed Baptifts,  and  which  diftinguQies  them  from  ail  other, 
denominations, 


I0& 

It  may  be  farther  obferved,  that  if  no  one,  however 
learned  and  wife,  be  able  to  trace  this  feci;  to  any  begin- 
ning ftiort  of  the  days  of  the  apoftles,  or  of  Chrift,  it  is 
poflible  that  it  then  arofe.  Befides,  if  all  other  religious 
denominations,  or  the  Psedobaptifts,  who  include  all 
which  are  not  Baptifts,  can  be  traced  to  a  probable  ori- 
gin fhort  of  the  apoftles,  and  the  Baptifts,  cannot  be,, 
it  affords  dill  more  probability,  that  they  might  have  a- 
rifen  then. 

I  wifli  my  readers  to  indulge  me  one  queftion,  and  to 
give  me  an  explicit  anfwer.  Are  you  willing  to  have 
the  origin  of  the  Baptifts  fairly  explored,  and  to  open 
your  eyes  to  the  light,  fhouid  light,  be  afforded  ? 

You  cannot,  my  Chriftian  readers,  unlefs  your  minds 
be  unduly  fwayed  by  prejudice,  do  otherwise  than  fay, 
Yes,  For,  though  you  be  not  very  friendly  to  the  Bap- 
tifts, you  will  not  deny  them  what  you  grant  to  your 
worft  enemy,  liberty  to  fpeak  the  truth,  and  that  truth 
its  weight,  at  ieaft  in  meafure, 

It  ought  to  be  particularly  noted,  that  my  object  is  not 
fogive  the  hiftory  of  a  name,  but  of  a  principle.  I 
(hall  not  contend  who  were  nrft  called  Baptifts,.  Ana- 
baptifts,  Mennonites  or  the  like  •,  but  who  have  held  the 
peculiar  fentiment  which  is  adopted  by  thofe  who  are 
called  Baptifts.  Wherever  we  find  this  principle,  there 
we  find  the  men,  the  Chriftians,  who,  had  thty  lived  in 
our  day,  would  be  ftyled  B-sptifts.  Nor  is  the  prefent 
eontroverfy.  this,  Whence  came  that  mode  of  baptifm, 
which  is  pra£l:fed  by  all,  who  are  known  by  the  nams 
$aptifts  ?  For  this  mode  is  granted, generally,  if  not  uni- 
verfally,by  all  learned  &  honed  men,  to  be  as  ancient  as 
John  the  Baptift  and  the  apoftles.  This  mode  is,  indeed, 
not  peculiar  to  the  Baptifts,  for  the  Pedobaptifts,  for 
many  centuries,  pra&ifed  this  mode  ;  and  many  of 
them,  do,  to  this  day,  pradtifc  ioamcrfion. 


107 

The  peculiar  chara&eriftic  of  the  Baptifts  is  this? 
They  hold,  that  the  ordinance  of  baptifm  is  to  be  ad- 
ministered to  adults,  or  to  vifible  believers  only. 

One  natural  confequence  of  this  principle  is,  when 
any  one  who  was  baptized,  or  fpiinkled,  in  his  infancy, 
comes  over  to  the  Baptifts'  fentiment,  they  require  him 
to  be  baptized.  Hence  they  are  called  Anabaptift6. 
Another  very  natural  confequence  is,  this  fentiment 
conftrainsthe  Baptifts  to  oppoie  the  baptifm  of  infants. 
Hence  they  are  diiiinguifhsd  by  the  name  of  Antipedo- 
baptifts. 

I  (hall  add  one  obfervation  more,  and  then  proceed  to 
give  you  a  fucciutt  hiftory  of  the  Baptifts.  The  ob- 
servation is  this  :  Whenever  I  find  perfons,  who  hold 
the  peculiar,  chara&criftic,  fentimewt  of  the  Baptifts,  I 
fhall  call  them  by  that  name.  Their  hiftory  now  fol- 
lows. 

I.  The  origin  of  the  Baptifts  can  be  found  no  where, 
unlefs  it  be  conceded  that  it  was  Jordan,  or  Enon. 

Dr.  Mofhe.im,  in  his  hiftory  of  the  Baptifts,  fays, 
"  The  true  origin  of  that  fed:,  which  acquired  the  de- 
nomination of  the  Anabaptifts  by  their  adminiftering  si- 
new the  rite  of  baptifm  to  thofe  who  come  over  to  their 
communion,  and  derived  that  of  Mennonites  from  ths 
famous  man  to  whom  they  owe  the  greateft  part  of 
their  prefent  felicity,  is  hid  in  the  remote  depths  of  anii- 
"quity,  and  is  of  cOnleouence  extremely  difficult  to  be  as- 
certained." 

Here,  Dr.  Mofaeim,  as  learned  an  hiftorian,  though 
not  fo  candid  a  one,  as  the  fcience  of  letters  can  bcaft, 
bears  pofitive  teftimony,  that  the  origin  of  the  BaptiiU 
is  hidden  in  the  remote  depths  of  antiquity.  Nothing  is 
more  evident  than  this  j  the  Docker  either  knew  not 
the  origin,  or  was  aot  candid  enough  to  confefs  it,     At 


i©8 

kaft,  we  have  this  conclufion,  that  he  could   find  their 
origin  no  where  fhort  of  the  apoftles. 

II.  A  large  number  of  the  Baptifts  were  fcattered, 
opprefied,  and  perfecuted,  through  many,  if  not  through 
all,  the  nations  of  Europe,  before  the  dawn  of  the  refor- 
mation under  Luther  and  Calvin.  When  Luthers  fe- 
xonded  by  feveral  princes  of  the  petty  ilates  of  Germa- 
ny, arofe  in  oppofitioa  to  the  overgrown  ufurpations  of 
the  church  of  Rome,  the  Baptifts  alfo  arofe  from  their 
hiding  places.  They  hoped  that  what  they  had  long 
expecled  and  praying  for  was  now  at  the  doors  the 
time  in  which  the  fufTerings  of  God's  people  fhould  be 
greatly  terminated  :  but  God  had  not  raifed  Luther's 
views  of  reformation  to  nigh  the  height  the  Baptifts 
were  expecting.  Their  detefcation  of  the  Mother  of 
Harlots,  owing  to  their  bitter  experience  of  her  cruel- 
ties, and  the  clear  gofpel  light  with  which  they  had 
been  favored  above  Luther, and  their  ardent  defire  to  be 
utterly  delivered  from  her  cruel  oppre{Hons,  made  them 
wilh  to  carry  the  reformation  farther  than  God  had  ap- 
pointed Luther  to  accomplifii.  They  were  foon  difap- 
pointed  in  Luther,  znd  probably  did  not  duly  appreciate 
the  reformation  which  he  was  inftrumentaliy  effecting-. 
It  was  as  rni^ht  have  oeen  expected  \  the  Lutherans 
and  the  Baptifts  fell  oiit  by  the  way  ;  and  Calvin  if  not 
Luther  warmly  oppofed  them.  See  Mojheimt  Cent,  XVL 
Chap.  iii.  Seft.  3.  Part  %. 

Mofheim,  vol.  IV.  page  4^7,  fpeaking  of  the  Baptifts, 
fays,  M  This  feci:  darted  up  all  of  a  fudden,  in  feveral 
countries,  at  the  fame  point  of  time,  and  at  the  very  pe- 
riod when  the  firft  contefts  of  the  reformers  with  the 
Roman  Pontiffs  drew  the  attention  of  the  world."  From 
this  we  have  one  plain  and  fair  deduction  %  that  the 
Baptifts  were  before  the  reformatio*  under  Luther  and 
Calvin,  and  therefore  did  not  take  their  rife  from  the 
Enthufiafts  under  Mtfffaer  and  Storck,  or  at  that  lime  \ 
or  at  Mu  after. 


109 

III.  The  Hufiites,  in  the  fifteenth  century,  the  Wick- 
lifHtcs,  in  the  fourteenth,  and  the  Pctrobrufians,  in  the 
twelfth,  and  the  Waldenfes,  were  all  Baptifts.*  To 
this  fad  Dr.  Mofheim,  bears  the  following  teftimony  -; 
It  may  be  obferved  that  the  Mennonites  (i.  e.  the 
Baptifts  of  Eaft  and  Weft  Friefiand,  Holland,  Gelder- 
land,  Brabant,  Weftphalia  and  other  places  in  the  North 
ef  Europe)  are  not  entirely  mistaken,  when  they  boalt 
their  defcent  from  the  Waldnefes,  Petrobrufians  and 
other  ancient  fe£ts,  who  are  ufually  confidered  as  wiincf- 
jes  of  the  truth  in  times  of  univerfal  darknefs  and  fuper- 
ftition.  Before  the  rife  of  Luther  and  Calvin,  there  lay 
concealed  in  almost  all  the  countries  of  Europe,  particular- 
ly in  Bohemia,  Moravia,  Switzerland  and  Germany, 
many  perfons,  who  adhered  tenacioufly  to  the  following 
doctrine,  which  the  Waldenfes,  Wicklifiites  and  Hufiites 
had  maintained  \  fome  in  a  more  difg-uifed  and  others 
in  a  more  open  and  public  manner,  viz.  That  the  king- 
dom  of  Christ,  or  the  vifible  church  he  had  establijhed  upon 
earth%  was  an  ajfembly  ef  true  and  real  faints ,  and  ought 
therefore  to  be  inaccejfible  to  the  wicked  and  unrighteous ■, 
and  afo  exempt  from  all  thofe  institutions  which  human  pru- 
dence fuggests  to  oppofe  the  progrefs  of  iniquity,  or  to  cor  reel 
and  reform  tranfgreffors.  This  maxim  is  the  true  fource 
of  all  the  peculiarities,  that  are  to  be  found  in  the  re- 
ligious do&rine  and  difcipline  of  the  Mennomus,  (or 
Baptifts  in  the  North  of  Europe)  and  it  is  rnoft  certain 
that  the  greatest  part  of  the fe  peculiarities  were  approved 
of  by  many  of  thofe  who,  before  the  dawn  of  the  refor- 
mation, entertained  the  notion  already  mentioned  rela- 
ting to  the  vifible  church  of  Chtift." 

From  this  teftimony  of  Dri   Mofheim   we  may  re- 
mark— 

i.  That  the  Mennonites  were  Baptift^  or  Anabap- 

*  Not  ell,  every  one  ;  but  all,  generally, 
-f  VoL  IV.  pages  $%%)  420. 
& 


110 

ti ft s,  for  thefe  different  names  he  ufes  to  exprefs  one  and 
the  lame  thing. 

2.  That  the  Petrobiufians  were  Baptifts  ;  for  the 
Baptitts  affert,  and  Mofheim  allows  it,  that  they  were 
their  progenitors  in  principle  and  practice.  Befides, 
in  his  hiftory  of  the  twelfth  century,  part  II.  chap,  v. 
feci.  7,  he  exprefsly  tells  us,  that  one  of  their  tenets 
was,  that  t\o pefons  whatfoeve  w;  e  to  be  baptized  befo  e 
fhey  wee  come  to  the  Jul!  ufe  of  thei :  ifo  1 . 

3.  That  the  Waldenfes,  WickKffites  and  Huflites 
were  Baptifts  9  for,  as  Mofheim  fays,  they  all  held  to  the 
great  and  leading  maxim,  which  is  the  true  fource  of 
all  the  peculiarities  that  are  to  be  found  in  the  religious 
doctrine  and  difcipline  of  the  Mennonites.  Thcfe  fev- 
eral  denominations  of  Chriftians  were  not  known  by  the 
ancient,  modern  and  appropriate  name,  Baptifts.  But 
their  doctrine  and  difcipline  were  the  fame  with  our 
Baptifts,  and  were  they  now  living,  they  would  be  thus 
called.  In  other  words  ;  juft  fo  far  as  they  were  con* 
fiftent  with  their  great  and  leading  mxaim,  and  juft  fo 
far  as  the  modern  Baptifts  are  confiitent  with  their  great 
and  leading  maxim,  juft  fo  far  thefe  ancient  and 
modern  Baptifts  are  alike  the  one  to  the  other. 

4.  That  in  the  fixteenth  century  the  Waldenfes,  Pe- 
trobrufians  and  other  ancient  feels  (i.  e.  of  the  Baptifts) 
were  ufually  considered  as  having  been  witneffes  of  the 
truth,  in  the  times  of  darknefs  and  univerfal  fuperfti- 
tioo.  How  differently  from  this  would  and  do  many 
confidcr  them  in  our  day  ! 

5.  That  before  the  rife  of  Luther  and  Calvin,  there 
Jay  concealed  in  almoft  all  the  countries  in  Europe,  par- 
ticularly in  Bohemia,  Moravia,  Switzerland  and  Germa- 
ny, many  perfons  who  held  the  fame  doctrine  and  dif- 
cipline with  the  Baptifts  in  our  day,  and  were,  of  neccflV 
ry  and  fair  conference,  of  the  fame  denomination. 


nr 

IV.  We  have  already  traced  the  Baptifis  down  to  the 
twelfth  century.  We  have  alfo  found  that  they  were 
fcattered  over  almoft  all  the  countries  of  Europe,  and 
were,  in  the  dark  ages  of  popery,  the  witneffes  of  the 
truth;  or  have  been  ufually  thus  confidered.  Btfide?, 
we  have  found  that  the  Waldenfes  were,  in  principle 
and  practice,  Baptifts;  or  in  other  words,  we  have 
found  that  the  Waklenfes  were  Baptifts.  We  will  now 
ftt  to  to  what  origin  we  caa  trace  the  Waldenfes. 

Dr.  Machine,  who  tranflated  Moiheim's  church  hifto- 
Ty  from  the  original  Latin,  gives  us,  vol.  III.  pages  1 i8> 
119,  under  note,  G,  the  following  hiftory  of  the  Wal- 
denfes. His  words  are,  **  We  may  venture  to  affirm 
the  contrary  (i.  e.  from  what  Mofheira  had  juft  faid  of 
the  Waldenfes  taking  their  name  from  Peter  Wakliu) 
with  Beza  and  other  writers  of  note  ;  for  it  fecms  evi- 
dent, from  the  befr  records,  that  Valdu6  derived  his 
name  from  the  true  Valdenfes  of  Piedmont,  whole  rior- 
trine  he  adopted,  and  who  were  known  by  the  name  of 
Vaudois  and  Valdnefes,  before  he,  or  his  immediate  fol- 
lowers, exifted.  If  the  Valdenfes,  or  Waldenfes,  had 
derived  their  name  from  any  eminent  teacher,  it  would 
probably  have  beet*  from  Valdo,who  was  remarkable  for 
the  purity  of  his  doctrine,  in  the  ninth  century, and  was- 
the  cotemporar.y  and  chief  counfellor  of  Berengarius. 
But  the  truth  is,  that  they  derive  their  name  from  their 
vailies  in  Piedmont,  which  in  their  language  are  called 
Vaux.  Hence  Vaudois,  their  true  name  ;  Hence  Peter,. 
(or.,  a3-  others  call  him,  John)  of  Lyons,  was  called  in 
Latin  Valdus,  becaufe  lie  had  adopted  their  do&rine  ; 
and  hence  the  term  Valdenfes  and  Waldenfes,  ufed  by 
thofe  who  write  in  Engiifh  and  Latin,  in  the  place  of 
Vaudois.  The  bloody  Inquifitor  Reiner  us  Sacco,  who 
exerted  fuch  furious  zeal  for  the  dcftrucliou  of'ihe  Wal- 
denfes, lived  but  about  eighty  ysars  after  Valdus  of  Ly- 
ons, and  muft  therefore  be  fuppofed  to  know  whether 
or  i:ot  he  was  the  real  founder  of  Valdenfes,  or  Le- 
oritts  •,  and   yet   it   is  remarkable,  that  he  fpeaks  of  the. 


112 

Leonifts  as  a  fe&  that  had  flourifhcd  about  five  hundred 
years  ;  nay,  mentions  authors  of  note,  who  make  their 
antiquity  remount  to  the  apoftolic  age.  See  the  acccunt 
'given  of  Sacco's  book  by  the  Jefait  Greifer  hi  the  Bibliothe- 
ta  Pairum.  I  know  not  upon  what  principle,  Dr. 
Mofheim  maintains  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  vallies  of 
Piedmont  are  to  be  carefully  diftinguiihed  from  the 
Wsidenfes;  and  I  am  perfuaded  that  whoever  will  be 
at  the  pains  to  read  attentively   the  2d,  25th,  26th,  and 

.  chapters  of  the  firft  book  of  Leger's  Hiitoire  des 
rs  Vaudoifes,  wiJl  find  this  diftinttion  entirely 
£fbiind!efs. — When  the  Papifts  afk  us  where  our  relig- 
ion was  before  Luther,  we  generally  anfwer,  in  the  Bi- 
oie,  and  vve  anrVei  wcii.  But  to  gratify  their  tafle  for 
•  .  idition,  and  human  authority,  we  may  add  to  this  an- 

r — and  in  the  vailies  of  Piedmont. 

To  the  above  ^e  may  add,  one  of  the  Popifh  writers, 
fpi  iking  of  the  Waldenftri,  fays,  «'  The  herefy  of  the  Wal- 
(le fifes  is  the  oldest  herefy  in  the  world"* 

\%  h  here  worthy  to  be  particularly  noticed — 

1.  That  ReinerusSacco  fpeaks  of  the  Waldenfes,  or 
Baptifts;  of  his  day,  as  a  fe£fc  that  had*  at  that  time,  flou- 
rifhed  for  about  five  hundred  years  *,  which  brings  the 
hiftory  of  ihe  Baptifts,  as  a  religious  feci:,  down  to  the 
fifth  century, 

That  this  fame  Reinerus  Sacco  mentions  authors 
of  riote,who  make  the  antiquity  of  the  Waldenfean  Bap- 
tilts  to  remount  to  the  apoitolic  age. 

3.  That  the  Baptifts  are  the  mod  ancient  of  all  the 
religious  lefts,  who  have  fet  themfelves  to  oppofe  the 
ghoilly  powers  of  the  Romanics. 

*   Prefdent  Edwards'  Hist,  of  Redcwpthn,  p.  267. 


rfj  : 

4.-  That,  if  there  be  any  body  of  Chriftians,  who 
have  exifted  during  the  reign  of  antichrift,  or  of  ihe 
nun  of  fin,  the  Baptifts  have  been  this  living  church  of 
Jefus  Chrift. 

5.  The  confequence  of  the  whole  fa  this •:  The  Bap- 
rid  have  no  origin  fhort  of  the  Apoftles.  They  arofe 
in  the  day?  of  Jtfhn  the  Baptift,  and  increafed  largely  in 
the  davs  of  our  blefifrd  Saviour,  when  he  fhowed  himfelf 
unro  If'rael,  and  in  the  dayt>  of  his  Apoftles,  and  have  ex- 
ifted,  under  the  fevertft  opprcllkms,  with  intervals  of 
profperity,  ever  fince.  • 

But  as  to  the  Pedobaptifts,  their  origin  is  at  once  tra- 
ced to  about  the  middle  of  the  fecond  century;  when 
the  rnyftery  of  iniquity  not  only  began  to  work,  but,  by 
its  fermentation,  had  produced  this  error  of  fruitful  e- 
vils,  namely,  that  bapiifm  was  efTential  to  falvation  ; 
yes,  that  it  was  regeneration.  Hence  arofe  the  nectfTi-* 
ry  of  baptizing  children.  Now  comes  forward  Ire— 
aceus,  and  informs  that  the  church  had  a  tradition  frcm 
the  Apoftles  to  give  baptifm  to  infants.  We  are  told  if* 
the  Appendix  to  Mofheim's  Church  Hiftory,  that  one 
of  the  Temarkabie  things  which  took  place  in-the  feccr.d 
century  was  the  baptizing  of  infants^  it  being  never 
known  before,  as  a  Chriftian  ordinance* for  them.* 

What  a  pity  it  is,  that  good  me?),  who  have  renoum- 
ced  the  error,  which  was,  as  church  hiftory  informs  us, 
the  progenitor  of  infant  b  apt  Km,  (hould  (till  retain  its 
practical  and  erroneces  offspring,  to  the  prejudice  and 
marring  of  the  church  cf-God  I  Not  a  (ingle  feci  of  the 
P^dobaptifts  can  find  its  origin  nearer  to  the  Apoftles 
lhan  the  fecond  century.  We  hence  conclude,  that 
their  origin  was  there,  a^d  that  they  then  and  there  a- 
rofe  in  the  myftery  which  was  then  working.  M?.f 
the  Father  of -lights  open  the  eyes  of  my  brethren,  t!iac 
they  may  come  out  of  this,  perhaps,  the  hit  thicket  oL  1 
grcis&ii?:  smd  dvrknefs. 
K  2    . 


m 

I  will  now  add—- 

V.  The  teftimony  which   President  Edwards  bears 
in  favor  of  the  Waldenfes  and  other  faithful  ones,  who 
were  fcattered  through  all  parts  of  Europe  in  the  dark. 
ages  of  Popery.     It  is  the  following  : 

M  In  every  age  of  this  dark  time,  there  appeared  par- 
ticular perfons  in  all  parts  of  Chriliendom,  who  bore 
a  teftimony  againft  the  corruptions  and  tyranny  of  the 
church  of  Rome.  There  is  no  one  age  of  antichrift9. 
even  in  the  darkeft  time  of  all,  but  ecclciiaftical  hiftori- 
ans  mention  a  great  many  by.name,  who  raanifefted  an 
abhorrence  of  the  Pope  and  his  idolatrous  worfhip,  and 
plead  for  the  ancient  purity  of  doctrine  and  worfhip, 
God  was  pleafed  to  maintain  an  uninterrupted  fuccef- 
fion  of  witneffes,  through  the  whole  time  in  Germany, 
France,  Britain,  and  other  countries,  as  hiftorians  de- 
monftratc,  and  mention  them  by  name,  and  give  an  ac- 
count of  the  teftimony  which  they  held.  Many  of 
them  were  private  perfons,  and  many  of  them  mimfters^ 
and  fome  magiftrates  and  perfons  of  great  diftin£tion. 
And  there  were  numbers  in  every  age,  who  were  per- 
secuted and  put  to  death  for  this  teftimony. 

<c  Befides  thefe  particular  perfons,  difperfed  here  and 
there,  there  was  a  certain  people,  called  the  Waldenfes* 
%vho  lived  feparate  from  ail  the  reft  of  the  world,  who 
kept  themfelves  pure,  and  conftantly  bore  a  teftimony 
againft  the  church  of  Rome,  through  all  this  dark  time. 
The  place  where  they  dwelt  was  the  Vaudois,  or  the 
five  rallies  of  Piedmont,  a  veTy  mountainous  country, 
between  Italy  and  France.  The  place  where  they  lived 
was  cornpaiTid  with  thofe  exceeding  high  mountains, 
called  the  Alps,  which  were  almoft  impafTablc  The 
pailage  over  thefe  mountaiaoug,  defert  countries,  was 
to  difficult,  tbst  the  valltes  where  this  people  dwelt  were 
almbft  macetsnhle.  There  this  people  lived  for  many 
agtf,  as  it  were  alene,   where,  in.  a  ftate  of   feparation 


from  all  the  world,  having  very  little  to  do  with  any* 
other  people,  they  ferved  God  in  the  ancient  purity  of 
his  worfhip,  and  never  fubmitted  to  the  church  of  Rome. 
This  place,  in  thisdefert,  mountainous  country,  proba- 
bly was  the  place,  efpecially  meant  in  the  xii.  chap,  of 
Revelation,  6  verfe,  as  the  place  prepared  of  God  for 
the  woman,  that  they  fhould  feed  her  there  during  the 
reign  of  Antichrift. 

ts  Some  of  the  Fopifli  writers  themfelvest  own  that 
that  people  never  fubmitted  to  the  church  of  Rome, 
One  of  the  Eopifh  writers*  fpeaking  of  the  Waldenfes* 
fays,  the  herefy  of  the  Waldenfes  is  the  oldeft  herefy  in 
the  world.  It  is  fuppofed,  that  this  people  fir  ft  betook, 
themfelves  to  this  defert,  fecret  place  among  the  moun- 
tains to  hide  themfelves  from  the  feverity  of  the  hea- 
then perfections,  which  were  before  Conftantine  the 
Great,  and  thus  the  woman  fled  into  the  wildernefs 
from  the  face  of  the  ferpent,  Rev.  xii.  6 ;  and  fo  verfe 
24,  And  to  the  woman  were  given  two  wings  of  a  great- 
eagle,  that  (he  might  fly  into  the  wildernefs  into  her 
place  where  (he  is  nourifhed  for  a  time  and  times  and 
half  a  time  from  the  face  of  the  ferpent.  And  the  peo- 
ple being  fettled  there,  their  pofterity  continued  there 
from  age  to  age  afterwards,  and  being  as  it  were  by  nat- 
ural walls,  as  well  as  by  God's  grace,  feperated  from 
the  reft  of  the  world,, never  par  look  of  the  overflowing- 
corruption." 

It  is  hoped  that  the  reader  will  very  carefully  and  can- 
didly compare  what  is  teftified  to  us  by  three  very 
learned  men,  Dr.  Mofiieim,  Dr.  Machine,  and  Prefi- 
dent  Edwards.  The  teftimony  of  the  firft  is,  that  the 
Waldenfes  and  many  others  who  are  ufua/ly  ccnfidered 
as  witnejfes  tf  the  truth  in  the  times  of  univerjal  darknefs- 
and  fuperstitioTty  were  efTentially  agreed  with  the  Bap- 
tifts  of  modern  date,  as  to  principle  and  pratlice%  or  as  to 
the  great  maxim,  whence  flow  all  the  peculiarities  of 
that  denomination.     His  leftimony,  in  lhort,  in  this » 


the  Hoi  (fifes,  the  "Wickliffites,  the  Petrobfufians  and  the? r 
Waldenfes,  with  other  witnefTcs  of   the  truth,  fcattered 
over  Europe,  in  the  dark  ages  of  Popery,  were  effentially 
the  fame  with  the  Baptifts  of  later  times  5  or  that  they 
aU  were  what  we  call  Baptifts. 

Dr.  Machine  teftifies   that  the  Waldenfes  flourished1 
as  early  as  the  filth   century  ;   yes,  he    informs  us   that 
fome   autr.ors  of  note  carry  their    antiquity  up  to   the 
^poftol-c  age. 

Prefirient  Edwards  informs  us  th?.t  thefe  Waldenfefr 
were  tl.e  main  body  of  the  church  in  the  ria>k  ag  s,  and 
kite- been,  together  with  thxir  fcattered  brethren,  the 
pure  church  of  Jefus  Ghrrft,  curing  the  reig»i  of  Anti- 
churt,  and,  of  certain  conic  quence,  were  (ucceflbrs  of 
the  pure  church,  from  the  days  of  Chritt  and  his  apof- 
t-les. 

The  fair  confluence  of  all  is  this,  that  the  Baptifts 
have  been  the  uninterrupted  church  of  our  Lord  from 
the  apoftles'  days  to  ours. 

I  may,  indeed,  exclaim,  What  have  I  been  believing,- 
what  have  I  been  doing,  with  refpe£i  to    the   Baptifts, 

all  my  days  ? 

I  know,  and  I  confefs  that  the  hltlory  of  the  church 
aflures  me  that  the  denomination  of  Chriftians  to  which 
1  have  belonged  and  to  which  I  do  full  vifibly  belong, 
came  through  the  church  of  Rome,  and  was  broken  oft 
from  the  mother  of  harlots,  and  it  is  not  greatly  to  be 
wondered  at,  if  all  her  filth  fbould  not  be  yet  wiped 
aw2y.  At  the  fame  time,  the  fame  hiftory  aflures  me, 
that  the  Baptifts  never  have  fubmitted  to  her  fuperfli* 
tions  and  £Uhy  abominations. 

I  am  fomewhat  furprized  at  my  own  long  continued 
ignorance,   and   at   the  yet  remaining   daikscfs  of  my 


ii7 

brethren,  as  to  this  matter.  But  above  all,  what  (hall 
I  fay,  at  the  hard  oppofition  which  fome  good  men  yet 
maintain  againft  their  brethren,  the  Baptifts  ?  Surely, 
they  might  with  great  propriety  be  addreffed  in  the 
words  of  Gamaliel  :  "  Take  heed  to  yourfelves  what 
ye  intend  to  do,  as  touching  thefe  men."  If  ye  will 
not  favor  them,  "refrain  from  them,  and  let  them  a- 
lone  j  for  if  their  counfel  or  work  be.  of  men,  it  will 
come  to  nought  j  but  if  it  be  of  God,  ye  cannot  over- 
throw it  j  left  haply  ye  be  found  even  to  fight  againft 
God." 

Ail  the  power,  craft  and  cruelty  of  the  wicked*  tho* 
praclifed  for  nighly  one  thoufand  eight  hundred  years* 
have  not  been  able  to  prevail  againft  them.  Surely  the 
mifguided  zeal  of  good  men  will  not. 

In  this  fhoit  Hiftory  of  the  Baptlfls,  we  fee  the  con- 
tinued accomplifhment  of  one  of  ChriftY  promifforyp 
predictions,  which  is,  Matt,  xvi.  1 8.  The  gates  of  hell 
Ihall  not  prevail  againft  the  church.  That  denomina- 
tion of  Christians  which  are  called  Baptifts,  are  the  only 
known  fociety  of  profeffing  Chriftians,  againft  which 
Satan  hath  not  prevailed,  either  in  point  of  doctrine,  sr 
difcipline,  or  both.  This  church,  or  old  and  inveterate 
herefy,  as  Satan  would  call  it,  he  acknowledges  by  the 
mouth  of  his  fervants,  the  Romamfts,  that  he  could 
never  fubdue.  It  is  true,  Satan  hath  joined  many  of  his 
legions  to  it,  as  he  did  many  falfe  brethren  to  the  difci- 
ples  i  ntfoe  days  of  the  apoftles.  But  he  hath  never,  no,, 
not  for  an  hour  prevailed  upon  this  ancient  and  primi- 
tive church  to  give  up  the  doctrines  of  grace,  or  the  ad- 
miniftration  of  the  ordinances  as  Chrift  delivered  them 
to  his  people  That  which  (he  fkft  received,  fhe  ftill 
holds  faft,  and  will.  In  all  the  hiftory  of  the  church* 
we  read  of  no  other  body  of  profeffing  Chriftians,  after 
which  Satan  hath  caft  fuch  a  continual  flood  of  water  \ 
but  hitherto  the  earth  hath  helped  the  woman,  and  the 


ji8 

flood  of  perfecution  hath  not  prevailed.     Satan's  future 
efforts  will  be  equally  without  effect. 

My  Fathers  and  Brethren  in  the  mini  dry,  and  my 
brethren  among  the  profeffed  difciples  of  the  Lord  Jefus 
Chrift,  fuffer  a  word  of  exhortation. 

If  you  will  not  take  up  the  crofs,  and  fo  increafe  the 
number  of  Chrift's  continually  preferved,  yet  always 
Juffering,  little  flock,  be  ye  careful  how  ye  fet  yourfelves 
in  array  againft  them.  For  more  are  they  who  are  for 
ihem,  than  are  thofe  who  are  againft  them.  With  you 
is  an  arm  of  flefn,  in  all  your  oppositions,  but  with  them 
is  the  Lord  their  God  to  help  them,  and  he  will  help 
them  ;  and  by  and  by  he  will  help  them  right  early. 

I  (hall  be  very  pleafingly  difappointed,  fhould  F  not 
be,  by  many  of  you  who  are  rulers  in  Ifrael,  fet  at 
nought,  for  coming  over  to  the  help  of  the  Lord  againft 
the  mighty.  But,  if  I  may  but  know  the  truth,  and 
pleare  the  Lord,  it  is,  with  me,  but  a  comparatively, 
fmall  thing  to  be  judged  of  you,  or  of  man's  judgment'.  I 
do,indeed,wi(h  for  the  continuance  of  your  good  opinion 
and  fcriendfhip,  but  I  cannot  poffefs  them  at  the  expenfe 
of  truth..  That  I  might  teftify  unto  you  thefe  things,  I 
have  riflced  every  thing  which  the  world  calls  valuable, 
lam  now  determined,  and  through  the  grace  of  our 
Lord  Jefus  Chrift  I  hope  trut  to  the  end  of  my  life  I 
(hall  be  determined,  to  venture  every  thing  in  defence 
of  the  doctrines  and  ordinances  and  church  of  the  Son 
of  God.  Ibefeech  aU  of  you,  who  know  the  grace  of 
our  Lord  Jefus,  that  ye  do  not  as  did  many  of  the  chief 
rulers  in  Ifrael.  They  believed  on  Chrift,  but  did  not 
confefs  hirn*  becaufe  of  the  Pharifees  left  they  fhould 
be  put  out  of  the  fynago^ue  ;  for  they  loved  the  praife 
of  men,  more  than  the  praife  of  God.     John  xii.  42,  43,. 

You  have  now  heard  me  and  know  what  I  do,     You 
will  therefore    now  make   up  your  judgment.     But  I 


IT'9 

pray  you,  remember  one  thing  :  With  what  judgment 
ye  judge,  ye  (hall  be  judged. 

1  am,  Reader  f 

Thy  Servant,  for  the  Gofptfsfake, 

DANIEL  MERRILL. 


ERRATUM. 

In  page    12,    'Jth  line  from  the  bottom,  infert  (i  is  the 
Covenant  of  grace  j"   after  the  word  <  feal,\ 


A 


Scripture-Manual : 

OR 

A   PLAIN    REPRESENTATION 


OF    THE 


ORDINANCE  of  BAPTISM. 


DESIGNED   FOR    THE   USE   OF   ALL,  WHO  WOULD  ANSWER. 

A   GOOD   CONSCIENCE   TOWARDS   GOD  ;     AND  GIVE 

A   REASON    OF   THEIR  FAITH  AND  PRACTICE 

WITH    MEEKNESS   AND  FEAR. 


BY    SAMUEL  ''WILSON. 


THE  FIRST  PHILADELPHIA,   FROM  THE  NINTH   LON- 
DON, EDITION. 


TO  WHICH   IS   ADDED, 

Rutherford's  Exercifes  of  Mind  refpetling  the  Invalidity  of 
Infant  Baptifm — -and,  Tejlimonies  of  divers  learned  Pado- 
baptijls,  in  favour  of  Believers  Baptifm. 

Search  the  Scriptures. John  v.  39. 


PHILADELPHIA, 
PRINTED    BY    LANG   &    USTICK, 

*795- 


TO  THE  READER. 


JL  T  is  a  worthy  obfervation  of  the  much 
celebrated  Archbijhop  Tillotfon,  "  In  procefs  of 
"  time,  the  beji  inftitutiom  are  apt  to  decline,  and 
"  by  infenfible  degrees  to  fwerve  and  depart  from 
"  the  perfection  of  their  firft  fkate  ;  therefore,  it  is  a 
"  good  rule,  to  preferve  things  from  corruption 
"  and  degeneracy,  often  to  look  back  to  the  firft 
"  inflitution,  and  by  that  to  cor  reel  thofe  imper- 
**  feclions  and  errors  which  will  almoji  una- 
voidably  creep  in  with  time" 


a 


How  far  the  reverend  authors,  who  left  the 
world  the  following  teftimonies,  have  acled  con- 
formably to  the  above,  and  more  efpecially  to  their 
majier's  will,  is  now  propofed  to  the  candid  reader. 
Both  fat  out  on  the  enquiry  prepojfeffed  in  favour  of 
the  popular  praclice  ;  yet  from  a  tender  concern  for 
divine  authority,  wifely  acted  in  imitation  of  the 
noble  Bereans,— the  iffue  was,  thai  they  found 
themf elves,  by  the  overbearing  light  of  truth,  obli- 
ged to  difcard  former  fentiments,  then  cheerfully 
complied  with  the  flocphtrd's  voice. 


PREFACE. 


J-  H  E  very  extraordinary  zeal,  which 
has  lately  been  exprejfed  from  the  pulpit,  and  the 
prefs,  for  Infant -b  a piifm,  as  an  ordinance  of  God, 
er  of  unquestionable  and  divine  authority,  put  me 
on  reviewing  the '  evidence,  by  which  I  was  for- 
merly convinced  of  the  contrary. 

And  as  I  do  not  remember  to  have  met  with  any 
thing  onthe  fubjetl  exaclly  in  this  form  ;  f  it  has 
no  other  advantage,  it  may  point  out  a  method  of 
enquiry  to  thofe  who  make  the  word  of  God,  the 
rule  of  their  faith  and  praclice. 

There  are  fome  few  hints  taken  from  modern 
authors  ;  but  the  main  is  the  judgment  I  formed  of 
thofe  things  at  the  time  referred  to. 

I  have  only  to  add,  I  am  not  confcious  of  a  wilful 
vufinterpreiation  of  any  text,  but  have  faithfully 
given  what  I  apprehended  to  be  the  real  fenje  of 
the  Holy  Ghofl ;  to  whofe  influence  and  blejjing  I 
humbly  recommend  it. 

S.  W. 


A  Scripture-Maffual}   &c. 


R  HAT  Baptifm  is  an  ordinance  of  Jefus  Chri(r,  is; 
admitted  by  the  generality  of  thofe  who  call  themfelves  Chiif- 
tians.  That  it  is  of  Jlanding  vfe  in  the  church  of  God, 
appears  from  the  *  nature  of  the  inftitution  when  rightly 
underftood,  and  the  promife  of  the  great  Head  of  the  church 
.  to  his  miniflers  in  the  administration  of  it :  Lo,  I  am  with 
you  alway,  even  to  the  end  of  the  world. 

And  as  this  ordinance  is  diftinguifhed  from  others,  in  its 
limitation  to  ^Jingle  adminiftration,  without  repetition  ;  great 
care  mould  be  taken,  that  we  acl  agreeably  to  the  mind  06 
Chrift  in  it :  what  is  to  be  done  but  once  in  the  Chrifdan's 
life,  ousht  to  be  done  well. 

It  is  certain,  men  are  apt  to  run  into  extremes  ;  fome 
may  poflibly  make  too  much  of  Baptifm,  fuppofing  it  to  be  a 
regenerating,  or  jujiifying  ordinance;  that  it  wafhes  away  the 
guilt  of  original  fin,  and  is  always  accompanied  with  the  con- 
veyance of  grace.  Others  may  think  as  meanly  of  it,  as  a 
mere  circumitantial  ritual,  cr  teft  of  obedience  to  a  pc: 
precept,  with  little,  if  any  fpiritual  meaning. 

Nor  are  men,  good  and  learned  men,  lefs  divided  abont 
thefubjecls  and  mode  of  this  facred  inftitution.  If  this  arofe 
from  the  obfeurity  or  ambiguity  of  the  terms  in  which  it  is 
revealed,  it  might  carry  the  appearance  of  fome  reflection  on 
the  wifdom  of  the  law-giver  ;  it  being  a  duty  of  common 
concern,  in  which  the   plained  Chriftian  is  as  deeply  inter-" 

*  A  folemn  acknowledgment  of  the  divine  glories,  rnd  a  profeffed 
fubjeclion  to  the  authority  of  Father,  Son,  ?nd  Spirit,  with  a  thank- 
ful recognition  of  the  burial  and  refurre&ion  of  our  Lord  Jeius 
Chrift;  in  tiu  view  of  which  we  dcfi:o  to  d".e  unto  fin,  and  live  unto> 
hciinefj. 

A   2 


[     6     ] 

efted,  as  men  of  the  greateft  capacity  or  literature  r  but  if  it 
appears,  that  God  has  not  been  wanting  in  this  matter,  and 
that  the  fcripture  account  of  it  is  in  terms  of  a  determinate 
gleaning,  and  eafy  to  be  underftood ;  whatever  darknefs  may 
attend  our  minds,  we  have  no  room  to  quarrel  with  revela- 
tion. 

It  is  now  near  thirty  years,  fince  I  firfr.  examined  this  mat- 
lex  :  and  I  am  lure  no  one  could  enter  into  the  enquiry,  with 
more  earneft  deilre  to  find  it  on  the  fide  of  the  cowman  practice  ; 
all  my  converfation  and  profpedls  leaning  ftrongly  that  way. 
The  method  I  took  was,  I  hope,  in  a  dependance  on  God, 
whofs  direction  I  earneftly  implored,  to  collect  the  whole 
evidence  from  fcripture,  to  confider  carefully  every  part  fepa- 
ratclr,  that  I  might  know  what  was  his  good  and  acceptable 
t/ill  in  this  fervice. 

And  whether  I  fhoiild  happily  attain  the  defirable  end  or 
not,  I  remember  I  found  great  peace  in  the  integrity  of  the 
determination.  Accordingly  looking  up  to  heaven,  I  fet 
myfejf  to  fearch  the  fcriptures. 

The  quellions  before  me  were, 
Whether  believers,  or  perfons  profiling  faith  and  repent- 
ance only  ; 

Or  believers  and  their  natural  offspring,  or  infants  in  com- 
mon., were  the  proper  fubjecls  of  baptiim  ? 

And  whether  the  manner  ofadminiitration  was  by  immer- 
fion  or  plunging*  or  by  fprinklirg  or  pouring ;  or  whether 
either  might  be  ufed  indifferently  ? 

Conudering  that  Baptifm  was  an  ordinance  peculiar  to  the 
goiVel-difpenfadon  ;  I  thought  it  moit  natural,  to  expect  an 
accota  ci'iinthe  New  Te  {lament.  Accordingly  I  began 
with  the  gofpei  cf  St.  Jtifafthifu,  and  in  inz  third  chapter  met 
with  ;  wing  defcriptioB  of  Jchti:s  baptifm : 

hi  tbsfe  days  came  John  the  Baptifc,  pratching  in  the  ivil- 
dtrmfs  cf  Jttdea  ;  and  faying,  Repent  ye,  for  the  kingdom  of 
heeroen  is  at  hand.  That,  then  went  out  to  him  Jerufalem, 
fad  all  Tudea,  and  all  the  region  round  abf.it  Jordan,  and 
taptfeed  of  him  in  Jordan,  confe[f:t:g  their  Jins. — And 
that  when  he  fazu  many  of  the  Pharlftes  and  Sadducees 
tome  to  his  JBapttj/m,  he  faid  unto  them,  0  generation  of 
vipers,   who  bath  warned  you,  &s.      Bring  forth,  therefor?, 


t  1  ] 

fruits  meet  for  rrpenidtice,  and  think  not  to  fay  within  yourfelvei. 
We  have  Abraham  to  our  father,  &c. 

Here  I  found  thai  John  had  a  fpecial  commimon  given 
him,  to  preach  and  baptize. 

That  the  fubftance  of  his  miniitry,  was  the  doctrine  of 
repentance,  in  the  view  of  the  near  approach  of  the  Meiiiah  : 
Repent,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand* 

That  his  fuccefs  was  very  extraordinary,  multitudes  flock- 
ing after  him,  to  hear  him  preach,  and  be  baptized  of  him, 
Jerufalem,  and  all  Judea,  and  the  region  round  about,  &c. 

That  the  place  of  his  preaching,  was  the  wildernefs  ;  and 
of  his  baptizing,  the  river  Jordan. 

That  the  action  was  baptizing — » 

And  that  the  difpofition  of  mind  required  in  the  fub- 
jedls  was  repentance ;  and  fuch  repentance  as  mould  be  pro- 
ductive of  good  fruits  ;  and  where  this  was  wanting,  a  rela- 
tion to  Abraham  as  their  father  did  not  entitle  them  to  his 
baptifm. 

This  appeared  to  me  to  be  the  fum  of  the  account  ',  and  I 
could  not  help  obferving, 

There  is  no  intimation  of  children  being  brought  by  their 
parents  to  John. 

Not  a  word  of  his  baptizing  them. 

No  recommendation  of  this  to  their  parents,  as  a  duty  to 
be  afterwards  performed  by  them,  in  confequence  of  their 
being  profelyted  to  his  doctrine.  No  hint  of  pouring  or 
fprinkling  ;  but  that  John  baptized  the  people  in  the  river 
Jordan,  and  that  he  did  this  on  their  repentance  or  profef- 
iion  of  it.  Tlits  far  the  evidence  being  fcr  adult  baptifm,  I 
proceeded  to  confider  the  baptifm  of  oar  Lord,  as  defcribed 
in  the  fame  chapter,  verfes  13,  14,  1 5,  16.  Then  cometh 
Tefus  from  Galilee  to  Jordan,  to  John  to  he  baptised  of  him. 
Lui  John  forbad  him,  faying,  I  have  need  to  be  baptized  of  thee, 
and  comefl  thou-  to  me  ?  And  Jefus  anfwering,  faid  unto  him, 
fitffl-r  it  to  be  fo  novo  :  for  thus  it  becometh  us  to  fulfd  all  righie* 
onfnef.  Then  he  fujf.red  him.  And  Jefus,  when  he  was 
baptized,   went  up  Jlraightway  out  of  ihe  water,   &C 

Here  I  obferved  our  Lord  did  not  fend  to  John  to  come 
and  baptize  him,  but  went  himfelf  from  Galilee  to  Jordan, 
the   place  where  John  was  baptizing  j  offered  himfelf  as  a 


[     «     ] 

fuhjtvfr.  John,  apprehenfive  of  his  fuperior  glory,  modefHr 
refufes.'  Our  Lord  infills  on  it,  as  apart  of  righteoufnefs  it 
became  him  to  fulfil  John  baptized  him,  and  as  * Mark  ex- 
pre-  .  in  tne  river1 Jordan  ;  and  from  the  exprefficn  of 

his  coming  out  of  the  water,  I  concluded  it  was  by  immer- 
£oc. 

I  took  notice  of  a  difference  between  this,  and  the  former 
account.  Here "  was  no  preaching  on  John's  part  ;  no 
repentance  required  of,  or  coofeffed  by  our  Lord  Jefus  pre- 
vious to  baptifm  :  thefe  the  dignity  and  purity  of  his  perfon 
rendered  unneceffary.  He  had  the  richeft  unction  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  was  holy,  harmlefs,  and  undefiled.  How- 
ever, he  appeared  with  great  zeal  to  engage  in  the  duty  ;  and 
I  thought  he  fpoke  as  the  head  of  the  church,  and  example 
of  his  people,  when  he  faid,  Thus  it  becometh  us  to  fulfil  all 
righteoufnefs. 

The  next  place  I  confulted,  was  Mat.  xix.  13,  14.  com- 
pared with  Mark  x.    13.   and  Luke  xviii.  15. 

Then   were  there   brought  unto  him   little  children,  that  Be 
fhoula  put  h:s  hands  on  them  .  nd  pray  :  and  the  difciphs  n 

But    Jefus  faid,  fujfer  little  children,    and  fori  id 
unto  me  :  for  of  fitch  is  the  kingdom  ofheai 
This  I  had  often  heard  quoted  in  favor  of  infant-baptifm, 
and  therefore,  though  I  did  not  find  the  word  brptize  in  the 
text,  I  thought  it  deferred  a  particular  confideration. 

And  the  firft  thing  which  came  before  me,  was  the  de/Jrs 
of  the  parents  or  friends  of  thofe  children,  or  what  they 
aimed  at  in  bringing  them  to  Chrift;  and  the  evangelilt  Mat- 
.  hen  feys,  it  was  that  he  fhouldjnd  his  hands  on  them  and  pray, 
Mark  and  Luis  fay,  that  he  might  touch  them',  neither  of 
them  give  the  leaft  hints  as  to  any  defire  or  requert  that  they 
might  be  baptized. 

I  then  confidered  the  conduct  of  cur  Lord  on  this  occa- 
fion,  and  the  text  fays,  he  took  them  up  in  his  arms,  put  his 
hands  on  them,  and  tlejfed  4/v,  .  5  -  is,  and  no  more,  our 
Lord  did  at  this  time,  as  I  could  find,  by  comparing  the 
evangelifts. 

This  led  me  to  coofider  the  reluctance  of  the  difciplcs, 
that  thefe  children  fhculd  be  brought,  and  cur  Lord's  dii- 

/    *  Mark  i.  9 . 


[     9     ] 

pleafure  fignrfied  by  his  check  of  them,  fuffer  little  children  to 
come  unto  me,  for  of  fuch  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

What  the  difciples  reafon  was  for  oppofing  them,  is  not 
recorded  :  I  thought  it  could  not  be  from  an  uniuillingnefs 
that  infants  mould  be  baptised,  had  that  been  the  practice  of 
John,  or  the  known  will  of  their  Ivlafter.  This  they  could 
hardly  be  guilty  of ;  nor  does  our  Lord  take  the  leaf!  notice 
of  it  in  his  reproof:  it  is  likely  they  were  uneafy  he  mould 
be  interrupted  from  attending  to  matters,  they  judged  of 
greater  importance  ;  but  however  this  was,  I  found  they 
flood  reproved,  and  the  reafon  given  was, 
For  of  fuch  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
Here  I  confidered  the  kingdom  of  heaven  mull:  intend  the 
kingdom  of  grace  or  glory. 

And  frit,  I  began  with  the  kingdom  of  grace,  and  pre- 
fently  faw,  that  it  muft  either  be  the  invifible  church  or 
general  afTembly  of  the  firft-born,  whofe  names  are  writtea 
in  heaven,  or  particular  churches  confUtuted  in  gofpel-order : 
for  I  could  have  no  notion  of  a  national  church,  under  the 
New  Teftament-difpenfation.  Accordingly  I  brought  infants 
to  each  ofthefe,  endeavoring  to  come  at  the  truth.  As  to 
the  invifible  church,  confirming  only,  as  I  could  fee,  of  the 
election  of  grace,  I  thought  whether  all,  or  toho  among 
infants,  are  a  part  of  it,  could  only  be  known  to  God  ;  and 
this  being  a  matter  wholly  unrevealed,  I  could  not  fee  how 
it  could  give  them  a  right  to  Baptifm. 

As  to  particular  churches,  it  did  not  appear  that  infants  were 
claimed  or  treated  as  members  ;  nor  could  I  understand  their 
capacity  ior  mernberfhip,  which  feemed  to  be  founded  in  the 
New  Teftament,  on  a  declared  agreement  of  the  faints  in  prin- 
ciples and  experience. 

I  then  confidered  the  kingdom  of  glory,  confiding  in  the 
beatific  virion,  and  enjoyment  of  God.  And  here  I  pre- 
fently  found,  mv  wimes  out-run  revelation  ;  and  in  the  iiilie, 
was  obliged  to  leave  infants  to  the  fovereign  mercy  of  Him, 
who  is  the  Judge  of  the  earth,  and  will  do  nothing  but  what 
is  right.  Nor  could  I  fee,  on  the  iuppofition  of  their  being 
all  admitted  to  that  kingdom,  of  which  I  could  find  wo  f crip- 
ture  aiTurance,  that  their  right  to  baptifm  was  evinced,  with- 
out a  m  live  law-giver  pf  the  church,  or  feme 


[     io     ] 

tiecejfary   connection    between    that    ordinance    and  eternal 
life. 

Muling  on  thefe  things,  I  looked  a  little  farther,  and  foon 
found  the  difficulty  removed,  and  the  expreflion  cleared  up, 
cffuch  is  ihe  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  that  is,  as  our  Lord  adds, 
verily,  I  fay  unto  you,  whofoever  fhall  not  receive  the  kingdom 
of  God  as  a  little  child,  heJJjall  not  enter  therein,  or  as  Luke 
has  it,  in  no  'wife  enter  therein. 

It  now  appeared,  that  our  Lord  was  fpeaking  of  the  temper, 
and  not  merely  of  the  perfons  of  children  ;  and  what  greatly 
confirmed  me,  was  a  parallel  paffage,  Mat.  xviii.  2,  3.  Jefus 
tailed  a  Utile  child  and  fet  him  in  the  midjl  of  them,  and  faid, 
verily  I  fay  unto  you,  except  ye  be  converted,  and  become  as  little 
thildren,  ye  Jloall  not  enter  into  ihe  kingdom  of  heaven.  An*d 
adds,  whofoever  therefore  Jhall  humble  himfelf  as  this  little  child, 
the  fame  is  the  greatefl  in  ihe  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  whofo 
Jhall  receive  one  fuch  little  child  in  my  name,  recerveth  me:  and 
whofoever  Jhall  offend  one  cf  thefe  little  ones  'which  believe  in  me, 
it  were  better  for  him,  that  a  mil/lone  were  hanged  about  Ins 
neck,  and  that  he  were  drowned  in  the  depth  of  the  fea. 

Here  I  compared  the  expremons  of  receiving  Chriit,  and 
receiving  one  of  thefe  little  ones,  making  profemon  of  his 
name,  and  the  little  ones,  believing  in  him,  with  the  dreadful 
nature  of  the  threatening  in  offending  them;  and  I  could 
not  fee  how  thefe  could  be  applicable  to  mere  infants,  but 
were  all  well  adapted  to  younger  or  weaker  Chriftians. 

Upon  the  whole,  after  the  ftricleft  fearch,  I  could  find  in 
thefe  texts  nothing  relating  to  Eaptifm.  Nor  could  I  help 
thinking,  had  it  been  the  intention  of  our  Lord  that  infants 
mould  be  baptized,  he  would  not  have  omitted  the  practice, 
or  fome  difcourfe  abotrt  it,  on  occafons  which  fecmed  fo  natu- 
rally to  lead  him  to  it. 

Failing  of  my  hoped  for  difcovery  of  Infant-Baptifm  here, 
I  haftened  to  the 

Commimon  recorded  Mat.  xxviii.  18,  19,  20.  compared 
with  Mark  X7i.  i£,  16. 

All  power  is  given  to  me  in  heaven  and  inearth.  Go  ye 
therefore  and  teach  all  nations,  baptising  them  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghofl.  Teaching 
them  to  olfervc  all  things,  whatfoevcr  I  have  commanded  you  : 


C    «*i  J 

and  lo    I   am  -with    you  alway,    even    unto  the  end  of  the 
'world. 

Struck,  with  the  fupreme  authority  of  a  rifen  Jefus,  I  con- 
cluded from  the  folemnity  of  the  introduction,  it  muft  be  a 
very  heinous  affront,  to  add,  alter,  or  take  away  from  the 
facred  commandment.  And  with  a  mind,  I  truft,  poiTelTed 
with  reverence  of  his  Majefty,  I  entered  into  a  meditation 
on  the  precept.  Here  I  found  the  perfons  charged  with  the 
commiilion  were  the  apoiUes ;  v/ho,  notwithftanding  the 
eminence  of  their  character,  and  peculiars  of  their  after  unc- 
tion, were  not  to  make,  but  publifh  and  explain  the  laws  of 
Chrift.  That,  and  only  that  which  they  received  of  the 
Lord,  were  they  to  declare  to  the  church.  And  from  the 
nature  of  the  duty  enjoined,  and  the  reach  of  the  promife, 
e'oen  to  the  end  of  the  world,  I  judged  all  gofpel-minifters  to 
be  included  in  the  commiilion. 

The  duty  enjoined-,  or  fervice  to  be  performed,  was  to 
teach  and  bautize. 

j. 

Or  as  I  underllood  it,  to  make  difciples  by  teaching, 
(£or  I  could  not  think  of  any  other  way)  and  then  to 
baptize  them. 

The  fubje&s  of  initruction  and  baptifm,  were  all  nations, 
or  as  Mark  has  it,  all  the  world,  and  every  creature,  Gen- 
tiles, as  well  as  Jews ;  not  every  individual,  for  the  abfur- 
dity  of  that  was  moil  glaring  ;  but  fuch  as  were  capable  of 
receiving  the  doctrine,  and  making  a  profellion  of  it,  in-order 
to=  Baptifm. 

The  time  of  baptizing,  according  to  the  evangeliit  Mark, 
feemed  to  be  when  they  believed ;  or  as  Matthew  has  it, 
when  they  were  taught  or  made  difciples.  And  the  manner 
in  which,  when  I  confidered  the  principal,  moil:  common 
and  natural  ienfe  of  the  word  Baptifm,  with  the  ufe  of  it  in 
John's  baptifm,  appeared  to  me  to  be  by  immerfion  ;  and  I 
was  the  more  confirmed  in  this,  from  John's  chufing  a  place 
to  baptize  in,  where  there  was  much  water  :  John  iii.  23. 
I  tried,  and  tried  again,  to  bring  in  infants  under  the  general 
term  of  all  nations ;  but  Mark's  believeth  and  is  baptised, 
with  Matthew's  teaching  them  to  obferve  whatfoever  I  have 
commanded  you,-  obliged  me  to  conclude  it  mud  be  confine 
to  the  adult. 


[       12       ] 

Thus  far  the  balance  Teemed  to  be  on  the  fide  of  the 
Antipaedobaptifts  ;  but  having  determined  when#I  fet  out,  to 
examine  the  whole  evidence,  I  purfued  the  enquiry,  and 
being  thoroughly  fatisfied  that  the  apoftles  could  not  miftake 
their  mafter  ;  I  thought  if  I  was  miftaken  in  my  apprehenfion 
of  his  will,  in  the  commiflion,  I  mould  be  fet  right  by  their 
conduct.      I  began  with  Peter's  fermon  :  Acts  ii. 

The  point  the  apoflle  aimed  at,  I  found  in  verfe  37: 
Therefore  let  all  the  houfe  of  Ifrael  hnoiv  ajfuredly,  that 
God  hath  made  that  fame  Jefus,  whom  you  have  crucified,  both 
Lord  and  Ckr'ifl.  Xxi  this  he  afferts  the  glory  of  the  perfon 
crucified,  he  was  Lord  of  all,  and  charges  them  directly 
with  his  murder  :  they  had  crucified,  or  with  wicked  hands 
had  flam  him. 

The  effect  was,  They  were  pricked  in  the  heart,  and  cried  \ 
out,  Men  and  brethren  ivhatfhall  <zue  do  ?  Upon  which  Peter 
faid  unto  them,  Repent  and  be  baptized  every  one  of  you,  in 
the  name  of  Jefus  Chrijl,  for  the  remijfiqn  ofjins,  and  ye  Jhall 
receive  the  gift  of  the  Rch  Ghqfi.  For  the  promife  is  unto  you, 
and  to  your  children,  and  to  all  that  are  afar  off",  even  as  many 
as  the  Lord  our  God fha  11  call.  It  is  added,  verfe  41.  They 
that  gladly  received  his  ivord  ivere  baptized,  and  the  fame  day 
there  tvere  added  ur.io  them,  about  three  thoufand  fouls.  And  * 
they  continued  in  the  atoflles  doclrine  and  fellonvfhip,  and  in 
breaking  of  bread,  and  in  prefers.  And  ver.  44.  All  that 
believed  <zverc  together,   and  had  all  things  common,   &C. 

Here  1  obferved  how  Peter  underfiood  his    commifiion  ;  ' 
he  began  with  preaching  cr  teaching — waiting  for  the  fuccefs 
of  his   labor.      Nor  did   I  'find  a  word  of  Baptifm,  till  they 
were  pricht'l  in  their  hearts  ;  then  indeed,   and  not  before,  he 
fays,'  Pepent  and  be  baptized,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jefus  ; 
v, 'Inch  I   underftood  after  this  manner  :   If  you   are   indeed  ■ 
grieved,  and  afhamed   of  your  conduct   towards   this  Jefus 
whom   you   have  crucified'  1     If  you   are    convinced  by  the 
Spirit  of  God,,  he   is  the  promifed  Meffiah,  the  Great  Re- 
deemer, and  King  of  his  church,  and  have  a  fiducial  depen- 
dence On  him  for  falvation  :   then  you  are  to  be  baptized  in 
Y'hanie,  and  may  hope  for  a  comfortable  evidence  in  your 
itifm,  of  the  remiflion   of  your  fins,  and  that  you  fhall 
ve  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghoft.     And  for  their  encou- 


[     i3     3 

ngement  he  adds,  for  the  promife  is  to  you  and  to  your  chil- 
dren, and  to  all  that  are  afar  ojjf  even  as  many  as  the  Lord  our 
Go'djhall  call. 

Now  I, thought  the  evidence  of  children's  right  to  Baptifm 
began  to  open,  efpecially  as  I  had  often  heard  this  verfe 
mentioned  as  an  inconteftibie  proof  of  it.  But  being  willing 
to  fee  with  my  own  eyes,  I  conlidered  what  this  promife 
might  be  ;  the  text  indeed  I  found,  if  not  wholly  filent,  yet 
not  direclly  expreflive  ;  but  on  clofe  reflection,  I  thought  it 
muft  be  either 

The  great  promife  of  the  Median,  as  the  feed  of  Abraham, 
in  whom  all  nations  mould  be  bleiTed  ;  or 

Of  the  remiifmn  of  (ins  for  his  fake  :  or  of  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghoft. 

Accordingly  I  brought  infants  to  each  of  thefe  ;  and  pre- 
fently  faw  as  to  the  firit,  the  great  honor  which  was  done  to 
the  Jews  and  their  offspring,  that  Chrift  fhould  be  allied  to 
them  according  to  the  flefli ;  but  found  no  reafon  to  con- 
clude, that  all  Abraham's  natural  children,  were  the  children 
of  the  promife  as  to  the  fpiritual  part  of  it ;  nor  could  I  fee 
how  the  general  prorn\£e  of  the  Mefliah,  as  the  feed  of 
Abraham,  could  give--,-. cm  a  right  to  Baptifm,  if  impenitent 
and  uncalled,  any  more  than  the  Gentiles,  or  thofe  afar  off. 

As  to  the  promife  of  the  re  million  of  fins,  I  faw  not  how 
this  could  be  claimed,  but  by  believers.  And  as  to  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Ghoft,  ifitwasofthe  fame  kind  with  what  had 
been  lately  poured  out  upon  the  Apoftles,  the  thing  fpoke 
for  itfelf ;  there  was  no  room  to  expect  it  in  a  ftate  of  infancy. 

By    Children,  then,  I    apprehend   muft    be    meant  their 
offspring,  when    called',  and    then  I  could   eafily  apply  the 
promife  to  them,  in  any  or  all  the  foregoing  fenfes. 
Upon  the  whole   I  found,    Peter  preached, 

The  people    repented,  and  gladly  received  the  word — 


were  baptized, 


added  to  the  church, 
and  walked  in  fellowship  ; 


and  encouragement  was  given  to  their  offspring,  that  with 
the  fame  experience?  or  when  called,  they  might  lock  for  the 
lame  privileges. 

B 


E    H   3 

I  could  not  but  think,  had  the  apdftte  intended  to 
their  right  >as  infants  to  Haptifm,  it  wxsjfrtifrge  very  Jhrangey 
that  no  notice  mould  be  taken,  either  then  or  afterwards,  of 
the  administration  of  it. 

The  next  account  of  Baptifm  I  met  with,  was  At~!s  viii.  12. 

But  when  they  believed  Philip,  preaching  the  things  concern- 
ing the  kingdom  of  God,  and  the  name  of  ff if  us,  they  were  bap* 
fitted  both  men  and  'Zvomcn. 

Here  I  found  the  Evangelic  agree  with  the  apodle,  and 
both  keeping  clofe  to  the  commiflion.  Philip  begins  \ 
preaching  the  gofpel,  or  things  concerning  the  kingdom  of  God, 
and  the  name  of  Chrifl.  The  people  believed  ;  and  when  they 
did  fo,  and  not  before,  he  baptized  them — And  they  are 
faid  to  be  men  and  women  :  the  phrafe  I  took  to  be  expreffive 
of  the  extent,  and  limitation  of  the  ordinance  ;  not  men  only, 
but  men  and  women  ;  not  men,  women  and  children,  but 
men  and  women  only. 

And  indeed,  I  thought  it  could  not  be  otherwise,  if  a 
perfonal  faith,  and  a  profefkon  of  it  were  pre-requifite  to  Bap- 
tifm.  And  thefe  I  found  were  infilled  on  by  this  Evange- 
lift,  in  the  cafe  of  the  eunuch,  recor&j-d  in  the  fame  chapter  ; 
the  account  of  which  ftands  thus  : 

V cries  26,   27,   28,  Sec. 

"The  angel  of  /he  Lord  fpake  unto  Philip,  faying,  arife  and 
go  toward  the  fouth,  Sec.  and  he  arofe  and  went,  and  behold  a 
rnan  6/" Ethiopia,  an  eunuch,  Sec.  who  had  come  to  jfertfalemfor 
to  woiflip,  was  returning,  and  flitting  in  his  chariot,  and  read 
Efaias  the  prophet.  Then  the  ffirit  faid  unto  Philip,  go  near 
and  join  thy f  If  to  this  chariot.  And  Philip  ran  t  hie her  to  him, 
and  heard  him  read  the  prophet  Efaias,  c.vd  fid,  tinder- 
Jlandeft  thoV.  what  thou  readejl  P  And  he  faid,  how  can  I,  except 
fame  manjhonhl  guide  me  ;  and  he  defined  Philip  that  he  would 
come  up  and  fit  with  him*  The  place  of  the  fcripture  which  he 
read,  was  this,  he  was  led  as  a  Jhcep  to  the /laughter,  Sec.  The 
eunuch  anfwered Philip,  end  faid,  I  pray  thee  of who?nfpeakctb 
the  prophet  this,  Sec.  Then  Philip  opened  his  mouth,  and  began 
at  the  fame  fcripture,  and  preached  unto  him  Jefus  ;  and  as 
they  went  on  their  way,  they  came  to  a  cert  ran  water  ;  and  the 
cr.nuch  faid,  fee  here  is  water,  if  hat  cloth  binder  1m  to  be  bap- 
I'vzed?  And  Phlip  faid,  if  thou  believcft  with  all  thine  heart, 


•J  ] 

\vered  ca?d  fal ',  I  belle.-. 

Chr'ifi  is  the  fan    of  God.-*r^&vd  he  *  har'tot  to 

i  Bill  i    And  th.y  went  dawn  both  i.  i'j  the  water?   bqth 

Up  and  the  eunuch,  ai  :   and  when  they 

Wire  come  up  out  oft.be  water,  the  fpik'ft  pf the   Lcrd  caught 

iy  Philips  a:id  ihe  euntythfaw  him  no  more;   l.kJ  he  went 

on  his  'way    clolchig. 

This  appeared  to  me  to  be  a  plain  and  expreffive  account 
of  the  fibjctls  :  e  of   Baptifm.      Philip   begins  with 

teaching,  or  preaching  Chrift  as  a  Saviour,  and  Sovereign  : 
The  eunuch  defires  to  be  baptized:  Philip  inn  ft  s  on  a  con- 
feilion  of  his  faith:  The  t\-.:.\.-S^ .gives  him  latisfacuon:  They 
both  go  cut  of  the  chariot,  and  Philip  baptizes  him  :  And  I 
could  not  help  obicnirg  the  peculiarity  of  the  phrafes  ;  they 
went  down  loth  into  the  water,  loth  Philip  and  the  eunuch  ; 
and  when  they  were  cune  up  cut  of  the  water,  &c.  wliich 
ftrongly  imprefTed  my  mind,  that  the  baptifm  cf  the  eunuch 
was  by  immerfion  ;  and  mart  be  defigned  to  defer  ibe  iorne- 
thing  more  than  bardygoing  to  the  fide  or  brink  of  the  water. 
.,    The  next  inftance  of  Baptiim  was  that  of  Cornelius ,A 'as  xth. 

And  oi  him,  it  is  {aid,  veife  the  fe$flnj4j  he  was  a  devout 
many  end  one  that  fea-ed 'God  with  all  his  hovfe :  which  I 
underwood  not  of  mere  babes,  if  he  had  any  ;  but  of  thofe 
who  were  in  fume  meafure  grows  up,  capable,  under  a  divine 
influence,  of  forming  iorue  appreheniions  of  the  glory  of 
God,  and  their  obligations  to  revere  and  ferve  him. 

By  the  direction  of  an  angel  he  fends  for  Peter — Peter 
begins  with  preaching  :  God  owns  his  minillry  :  The  Holy 
Ghoft  falls  on  all  thofe  which  heard  the  word  ;  and  Peter 
afks,  Can  any  man  forbid  water,  that  thefe  jhtuld  not  be  lap- 
lized,   which  have  netived  the  Ilr/y    Gh'.y '.',   as  ■:<  we  ? 

And,  he commanded thin  it  Ized.  * 

He;e  I  found  the  con^raj  '..n  ftnclly  regarded  an--  Jgep*  up 
to,  an  exact  conformity  with  tjje  forementioucd  iniu.nces  of 
Baptifm  ;  and  cumpaiing  the  exp;  ::Tions  cf  fearing  God  who 
all  his  hovfe,  ver.  2.   and  thtir  receiving  the  l-  ih-fc 

who  Liieved in  the  Lord  jfefus,   mentioned  chap,  xi.   ver.  1 7. 
I  law  no  realon  to  fuppofe  that  infants  were  of  that  number. 

This  led  me  to  confider  the  converf  on    and  baptifm  of 
Lydia,  of  whom  we  read,  Acts  }:\\.  14.  that  fiie  was  a  [Air 


t     16     ] 

cf  purpu-  '.'v  '/*  Thyatira,  who    worfhipped  God,  anct 

heard  the  apofile  ;  wbofe  heart  the  Lord 'opened,  andjhe  attended 
unto  the  things  which  were  fpoken  oj Paul ;  and  was  baptized, 
and  all  her  hovfhold. 

As  to  Lydia,  I  thought  there  could  be  no  difpute,  whe- 
ther me  believed  before  (lie  was  baptized  ;  the  text  averting 
that  me  worshipped  God,  and  that  the  Lord  opened  her 
heart. 

As  to  her  houfhold,  what  it  confided  of  is  not  faid ;  nor 
is  any  notice  taken  of  her  huiband,  if  (he  had  any  :  all  that 
appeared  to  me,  from  a  careful  examination  of  the  account, 
was,  that  me  was  not  at  home,  er  in  the  place  of  her  com- 
mon reiidence  ;  that  fhe  came  to  fell  her  purple,  had  a  houfe 
for  that  purpofe,  and  probably  fervants  to  aflift  her  in  her 
trade  ;  nor  could  I  fee  it  altogether  confident  with  prudence, 
to  bring  a  family  of  young  children,  if  (he  had  any,  into  the 
hurries  of  bufinefs. 

Upon  the  whole,  I  thought  it  might  be  fuch  a  houfe  as 
Cornelius  had  ;  who,  if  they  did  not  fear  God  before,  were 
converted  bv  a  bleiling  on  the  apoftle's  minilTry,  and  bap- 
tized with  their  miftrefs.  And  what  greatly  tended  to  con- 
firm me  in  this,  was,  that  the  perfons  the  apoftle  found  in 
Lydid's  houfe  when  he  entered  into  it,  are  called  brethren, 
and  were  comforted  by  h'm  ;  which  cannot  be  faid  of  infants  ; 
as  alio  the  account  of  the  conversion  of  the  jailor  and  his 
family,  contained  in  the  fame  chapter,  ver.  25,  26,  27,  Sec. 
which  is  as  follows  : 

At  midnight  Paul  and  Silas  prayed,  &c.  Suddenly  there 
was  a  great  earthquake,  &c.  The  keeper  of  the  prifn  would 
have  killed  hhvflf.  Paul  cried  with  a  loud  voice,  faying,  do 
thy f  If  no  harm.  The  keeper  called  for  a  light,  and  fj.  rang  in, 
and  came  trembling,  and  fell  down  before  Paul  and  Silas,  and 
b  ought  them  rut,  and  faid,  firs,  What  mfl  I  do  to  befaved  ? 
and  they  faid,  believe  in  the  Lord  J ef us  Chr'ifl,  andthcuflalt 
befaved,  and  thy  houfe.  And  they  fpoke  unto  him  the  word  of 
the  Lord,  and  io  all  that  were  in  his  houfe.  And  he  took  them 
the  fame  hour  of  the  night,  and  wajhed  their  flripes,  and  was 
baptised,  he  and  all  hisjlraight-way.  And  when  he  had  brought 
them  into  his  houfe,  he  fet  meat  before  them,  and  rejoiced,  believ- 
ing in  God  with  all  his  houfe. 


C    17    ] 

The  facl  here  I  thought  flood  thus — The  jailor  under  the 
power  of  ftrong  convi&ions  cries  out,  what  muft  I  do  to  be 
faved  ?  The  apoftle  anfwers,  believe  on  the  Lord  Jefus 
Chrift,  and  thou  fhalt  be  faved,  and  thine  houfe  :  that  is  as 
I  underftood  it,  if  they  believe  alfo  :  upon  which  they  fpake 
unto  him  the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  to  all  that  were  in  his 
houfe.  And  God  bkfling  his  word  to  the  jailor  and  his 
family,  they  believed,  were  baptized  and  rejoiced. 

This  led  me  to  confider  what  is  faid  of  Crifpus  and  the 
Corinthians  :   Acts  xviii.  8. 

And  Crifpus  the  chief  ruler  of  the  fynagogue  believed  on  the 
Lord  tvith  all  his  houfe  :  and  many  of  the  Corinthians,  hear- 
ing, believed,  and  ivere  baptized. 

Here  I  found  the  mailer  and  the  family  believers,  and 
that  the  Corinthians  heard,  believed,  and  were  baptized — And 
as  hearing  and  believing  are  mentioned  previous  to  the  bap- 
tizing of  the  Corinthians,  I  concluded  it  was  equally  fo,  in 
the  inftance  g^  Crifpus  and  his  houfe. 

The  lad:  inftance  I  met  with,  was  in  1  Cor.  1.  14,  15,  16, 
which  fpeaksofthe  baptizing  the  houfhold  of  Stephanas.  I 
thank  God  I  baptized  none  of  you,  but  Criipus  and  Gains  :  lejl 
any  Jhould  fay ',  that  I  had  baptized  in  my  own  name  ;  and  I  bap- 
tized alfo  the  houfhold  of  Stephanas,  &c. 

What  this  houfhold  was,  I  gathered  from  the  1 6th  chap. 
and  15th  ver.  where  the  apoftle  fays,  I  befech  you  brethren, 
ye  know  the  houfe  of  Stephanas,  that  it  is  the  Jirfi  fruits  of 
Achaia,  and  that  they  have  addicled themfefoes  to  the  miniflry  of 
the  faints.  Whence  I  thought  they  could  not  be  infants,  but 
believers  in  Chrift,  converted  and  baptized  by  the  apoirle  ; 
or  they  could  hardly  be  called  frf -fruits,  and.be  fa:d  to 
addidt  themfelves  to  the  miniflry  of  the  faints,  whether  we 
underftand  it  of  their  relieving  their  wants,  or  preaching  the 
everlafting  gofpel. 

Having  thus  gone  through  the  hiftory  of  baptifm,  as  admi- 
niftered  by  the  apofUes,  I  proceeded  to  confider  the  account 
they  gave  of  the  meaning  or  rpiritual  defign  of  it :  and  with 
this  view  compared  Rom.  vi.  3,4.  with  Col.  ii.  12.  Know 
ye  not  that  fo  many  of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Jefus  Chrifl,  ivere 
baptized  into  his  death.  Therefore  <we  are  buried  with  him  by 
baptifm  into  death  :  that  like  as  Chrijl  was  raifed  up  from  the 

B2. 


C     18     ] 

deadly  the  glory  of  the  Father,  even  fo  toe  alfo  fhould  walk  in 
vewnefs  of  life.  For  if  we  have  been  planted  together  in  the 
Ukcnejj  Ojf 'hu  death,  we  fhall  l>e  cdfo  in  the  likenefs  of  his  rcfur- 
reetion.  knowing  that  our  old  man  is  crucified,  &c.  And  in 
Colo/pans  I  found  the  fame  metaphor  kept  up  :  Buried  with 
';?,  tvherein  cdfo  ye  are  rifen  tvith  him  through  the 
faith  of  the  operation  of  God. 

In  forming  a  judgment  of  the  defign  of  the  Holy  Ghoft  in 
thefe  pafiages,  I  thought  it  necefiary  to  confide  firft  the 
defcription,  or  character  of  the  perfons  baptized  ;  and  they 
are  laid,  ver.  nth,  tirbu circumcifed tvith  the  circumcifion  made 
without  hands  :  which  I  knew  not  how  to  interpret  fo  well  of 
any  thing,  as  the  renewing  influences  of  the  Holy  Ghoft  :  agree- 
to  which  they  are  further  rcprefented  as  the  fubjects  of 
thai  faith  which  is  of  the  operation  of  God ;  or  as  it  is  elie- 
:re  called  *   precious  faith,  and  the  faith  of  God's  elect. 

The  metaphor  came  next  under  confideration.  They  were 
d  with  Chrift  in  baptifm  :  This  feemed  much  better  to 
to  immerflon  than  fprinkling  or  pouring — and  fuppof- 
ingthat  the  faith  mentioned  might  refer  to  their  being  hmritd 
as  well  as  riling  ;  this  I  thought  might  be  the  meaning  of  their 
g  planted  in  the  likenefs  of  ChriJVs  death  :  That  as  in  the 
ordinance  of  the  fupper,  there  is  a  believing  memorial  cf 
Chrift's  love  in  his  fufrcrings  and  deam  ;  fo  in  baptifm,  the 
'faint,  by  an  eve  of  faith,  is  called  to  attend  to  his  condefcen- 
Jion  when  imprifoned  in  the  grave,  and  his  glery  as  a  con- 
queror in  breaking  the  bands  of  death  :  in  each  of  which  he 
fufrained  the  character  of  the  fiirety  of  the  covenant  and  head 
of  the  body.  And  as  the  actions  of  breaking  the  bread  and 
pouring  out  the  wine,  are  expriiffive  of  his  agony  and  death  ; 
the  immerfion,  and  rifing  of  the  peifcn  baptized,  might  refer 
to  his  burial  and  refurrection. 

I  then  proceeded  to  examine  I  Cor.  vii.  14.  a  text  I  had 
often  heard  quoted  as  proving,  if  not  in  direct  terms,  yet  by 
jult  conference,  the  rights  of  infants  to  baptifm.  The  words 
are,  For  the  unbelieving  hufhand  is  fanciified  by  the  wife,  and 
the  unbeii  1  fanciified  by  the  hvj 'hand  ;   elfe  were  your 

children  unclean,  but  now  they  arc  holy._ 

*  a  Pet.  i.  1.     Tit.  1.  (. 


[     19     3 

I  began  with  the  occafion  of  the  words,  and  could  fxnd 
nothing  relating  to  baptifm  in  the  context.  An  affair  evi- 
dently of  another  kind,  employed  the  mind  of  the  apoftle  ;  to 
wit,  the  neceflity  or  expediency  of  attending  to  the  duties  of 
the  marriage-relation,  where  one  was  a  convert,  and  the 
other  an  infidel.  This  I  thought  was  the  point  in  view.  And 
it  (lands  determined,  that  the  wife  is  not  to  depart,  nor  the 
hujband  to  put  her  away  ;  unlefs  fome  other  circumflances 
ibould  render  it  necefTary  and  warrantable. 

And  to  remove  the  fcruple  of  a  tender  fpirit,  it  is  added, 
that  the  unbeliever  is  fanclified  by  the  believer  ;  by  which  I 
could  not  understand  an  internal  Spiritual  purity  of "mind,  this 
being  the  work  of  the  Divine  Spirit  :  But  as  every  thing  tKt, 
fo  the  marriage-relation  is  fane'tified  to  the  believer,  by  the 
word  of  God  and  prayer.  The  ignorance  or  enmity  of  the 
infidel,  would  not  render  the  faint's  confeientious  and  faith- 
ful difcharge  of  his  duty  lefs  necefTary  or  acceptable. 

And  to  enforce  his  determination  of  their  continuing  toge- 
ther, the  apoftle  adds,  elfe  were  your  children  unclean,  but  new 
they  are  holy. 

Here  I  confidered,  how  children  may  be  faid  to  be  un- 
clean ;  and  I  thought  they  are  all  fo  by  nature,  being  Jhapcn 
in  iniquity,  and  conceived  in  Jin.  The  guilt  and  pollution  of 
which,  can  only  be  removed  by  the  blood  of  Chrill,  and  the 
power  of  the  Holy  Ghoit.  As  to  this  I  could  fee  no  dif- 
ference between  the  feed  of  believers,  and  others  ;  all  are 
concluded  under  fin,  and  by  nature  children  of  wrath. 

I  then  remember  to  have  heard,  that  all  out  of  the  pale  of 
the  Jewifh  church  were  unclean,  as  oppofed  to  that  holinefs 
which  is  attributed  to  the  whole  congregation  of  Ifrael,  and 
that  fuch  uncleannefs  attends  the  children  of  unconverted 
Gentiles  now  :  But  confidering  Peter's  vificn,  in  which  he  is 
forbid  to  call  that  common  which  God  hath  clearfed  :  That  the 
middle  noutt  of  partition  is  broken  down :  That  in  regeneration, 
or,  the  tuzo  man,  there  is  neither  Greek,  nor  Jew,  circumejfion, 
nor  unci,  cumcifion,  Barbarian,  Scythian,  bond  nor  free,  but 
Chrifl  is  all  and  in  rdl — Remembering  the  peculiars  of  the 
Jewifh  church,  as  hereditary  and  national,  are  now  utterly 
fet  aflde,  I  could  fee  no  more  uncleannefs  in  one  infant  than 
in  another.. 


I       2°       3 

Upon  the  whole,  I  thought  the  affair  fettled  by  the  apoflle 
wholly  matrimonial :  it  was  highly  probable,  the  holiuefs  and 
vncleannefs  were  of  the  fame  kind  :  or  related  to  apparent 
legitimacy  or  illegitimacy. 

Nor  could  I  fee,  on  the  fuppofition  of  an  external  fort  of 
holinefs  derived  to  an  infant  from  a  believing  parent,  that  we 
are  to  conclude  its  right  to  baptifm  without  a  fpecial  direction 
from  the  lawgiver  of  the  church.* 

This  led  me  to  confider  the  apoflle's  account  of  Abraham, 
Rom.  iv.  II,  12,  13.  As  the  father  of  all  them  that  believe , 
though  they  be  not  circumcifed  ;  and  that  the  promife  is  of  faith, 
that  it  might  be  by  grace,  to  the  end  it  might  be  fure  to  all  the 
feed  ;  not  to  that  only  which  is  of  the  law,  but  to  that  alfo  which 
is  of  the  faith  of  Abraham,  who  is  the  father  of  us  all.  And 
that  he  received  thejign  of  circumcifion,  a  feal  of  the  righteouf- 
nefs  of  faith,  which  he  had  yet  being  uncircumcifed,  &c. 

This  I  found  commonly  indited  on  to  prove  that  Abraham's 
covenant  was  the  covenant  of  grace  ;  that  a  part  of  his  feed 
were  the  believing  Gentiles,  and  their  offspring  ;  and  that  as 
Abraham's  children  were  circumcifed,  the  children  of  be- 
lievers mould  be  baptized. 

To  come  at  a  certainty  in  this  matter,  I  thought  it  might 
be  proper,  carefully  to  enquire  what  the  covenant  was  which 
God  made  with  Abraham  :  the  duties  required,  and  privile- 
ges to  be  enjoyed  under  it ;  perfons  interefted  in  it  and  man- 
ner of  conveying  and  fignifying  that  intereih  The  covenant 
I  found  at  large  in  the  1 7th  of  Gene/is,  and  it  appeared  to 
me  to  be  of  a.  peculiar  kind  ;  fome  things  belonging  to  Abra- 
ham in  hxs  pcrjbnal  ch.7iX2iQ.tr,  as  that  he  mould  have  a  nume- 
rous pofterity  ;  that  kings  mould  defcend  from  him  ;  the 
making  over  the  land  of  Canaan  to  him ;  and  the  particular 
honor  of  being-  the  father  of  the  Meiliah  according  to  the 
flefh.  This  part  of  the  covenant  I  thought  difKnguimabie 
from  the  covenant  of  grace  ;  for  I  could  not  but  fee  he  might 
have  all  thefe,  without  any  fpecial  relation  to  God  as  a  child  : 
But  when  God  promifes  to  be  his  God,  to  blefi  him,  and  that 
in  his  feed  all  the  families  of  the  earth  Jl.ould  be  blejfed;  I  looked 

*  If  the  baptifm  of  infants  may  be  jnftified  from  this  paffage,  fo  may 
the  baptifm  of  the  vt:belie<v'rg  hufband  and  the  tg  wife ;    for  ■ 

the)  arc  faid  to  btfanctfed  or  i/oly,  as  well  as  their  children. 


L      M      ] 

upon  thcfe  to  be  promifes  as  expreffive  of  privileges  of  another, 
and  more  valuable  kind  than  any  of  the  former. 

And  as  the  covenant  appeared  thus  to  be  ot  a  mixt  nature, 
and  the  ok-flings  diftincT:  ;  fo  I  found  this  feed  to  be  defcribed 
very  differently  in  fcripture  :  fometimes  intending  all  his  na- 
tural children;  fometimes  the  perfon  of  Chrift  only  :  and 
here,  and  in  other  places,  all  his  fpiritual  offspring,  whether 
Jews  or  Gentiles. 

As  to  his  children,  who  are  only  Co  after  the  flefh,  they 
had  their  outward  advantages  :  but  not  as  I  could  fee  the 
bleffings  of  the  covenant  of  grace. 

As  to  Chrift,  it  did  not  appear  any  bleffing  was  derived  from 
Abraham  to  him  ;  but  on  the  contrary,  Abraham  received  the 
blefling  in,  and  from  the  Mefliah,  his  root  as  well  as  offspring. 
And  as  to  his  fpiritual  feed,  they  were  all,  whether  Jews  or 
Gentiles,  partakers  with  him  of  the  fame  faith  and  falvation. 

Circumcifion  I  thought  to  be  a  fign  or  badge  of  feparation 
to  the  Jew,  in  common,  as  diftinguifhed  from  the  Gentiles, 
and  perhaps  of  regeneration  to  his  fpiritual  feed  :  but  con- 
veyed, as  I  could  fee  no  fpiritual  blefling  to  either.  And  I 
thought  if  the  baptifm  of  infants  under  the  gofpel  was  to  be 
argued  from  circumcifion  ;  the  apoftie  would  certainly  have 
given  fome  hint  of  it ;  whereas  his  difcourfe  was  confined  to 
believers,  without  a  word  of  their  children. 

That  circumcifion  was  a  feal  of  the  righteoufnefs  of  faith 
to  Jibraham,  is  indeed  afferted  ;  but  that  it  was,  to  his  natu- 
ral feed,  I  could  form  no  idea  of:  at  leaft  till  they  had  by 
faith,  a  view  of  the  fame  righteoufnefs,  by  which  Abraham 
their  father  was  juffified. 

And  the  apoftie  feems  to  explain  the  whole  matter  :  Rem. 
ix.  5,  6,  7,  8.  They  are  not  all  lirael,  which  are  of  Ifrael, 
neither  becaufe  they  are  of  the  feed  of  Abraham,  are  they  all 
children  ;  that  is,  they  which  aie  the  children  of  the  flejh,  thefe 
arc  not  the  children  of  God,  hut  the  children  of  the  promife  are 
counted  for  the  feed.  Now  I  concluded,  if  this  ^vas  true  of 
the  natural  feed  of  Abraham,  a  believer,  certainly  it  could 
be  no  lefs  fo  of  the  offspring  ol  the  Gentile  believers. 

As  to  the  privileges  of  the  Jews  above  the  Gentiles,  the 
apoftie  is  expiefs,  that  unto  them  pertained  the  adoption,  and 
the  glory,  anil  the  covenants,  and  the  giving  of  the  law,  and  the 


w     J 

..',   and  the  prowls  :  atid  that  fre&  them,  as  con- 

e    ft:,    Chrift  came,  who  is  ever  all,  God  btrffn. 

•  \  Rom.  ix.  4 ,  $.  or  agreeable  tc  what  he  before  faid,  w.hen 

pulting  the  ,  what  advantage  then  hath  the  Jew,  or 

'what l  Jr.  fit  is  that  in  circum/Jion  ?    Pie  anfwers,    much  every 

■  :  chiefly  becavfe  u, no  them  were  committed  the  cracks  of  God. 

So  that  it  evidently  appeared  the  church  of  the  Jews  had 
its  glory  ;  but  as  the  fame  aroille  tells  us,  2  Cor.  hi.  10,  11, 
ihi'  was  as  noghry,  if  c:r- fared  with  the  glory  which  cxcelleth. 
Hut  f th  h  was  data  away  w as  glorious ,  mud:  more  that 

■which  reniainetb  is  glorious. -*fJ>b&%  is,   as  I  ur.deifiood  it,  all 
■the  carnal  part  of  jewifh  glory  was  fwall  \,  ard  utterly 

fet  aude  by  the  iimplidty,  fpirhuality,  and  Iberiy  of  the  gof- 
pel-difpenfation  ;  and  as  it  was  formerly.,  sill  were  no!  Ifraei, 
which  were  tf/Tkael;   lo   now  he  is  not  a  Jew,    wh.\  a  : 
ci-twarddy,  neither  is  that  circumc'fion,  which  is  culwaro'/y  in  the 
Jlefh  ;   lui  he  is  a  Jew,  which  is  cue  inwardly,  i:;:  f.  on 

ft  that  ef  the  h-eart,   in  the  fpirit,  and  rot  in  the  letter,   w-hofe 
praife  u  not  of  men,  lui  vf  God :    Rom.  ii.  ver.  28,  29. 

1  then  proceeded  to  confder  the  excifion  of  thl  jtws.  and. 
±he  taking  in  of  the  Gentiles,  recorded,  Rom.  xi.  15,  16.  in 
v/hich,  though  there  is  no  exprefs  mention  of  jJaptifrn,  or  of 
•the  baptifm  of  inf?mts,  yet  I  found  commonly  produced  as 
declarative  of  a  federal  holinefs,  conveyed  from  parents  to 
children  in  confequence  of  which  they  wight,  yea  ought  to  be 
LapJzed. 

Text — -I?  the  fafi-frv.it  he,  holy,  the  lump  is  alfc  he  *,  .-   c  rd if 
the  root  k."  hcly,fj  are  the  branches  ;  and  if  fori e  opthe  branch-s 
bebrohea  off,  and  thou  icing  a  wild  xveri  g raffed  in  among 

their. and  with  then: pari  a  kefl  ■-/'the  ■  art  and falncfc of  rht ud'rve-iree* 

That  converted  Gentiles  (hind  on  a  !e\  el  with  believing 
Jews  I  had  already  fee::.  That  -.he  peevhar  form  of  the 
Jewifh  church  was  aboiifned  at  ::he  dea-.h  of  Ch:i;!",  I  & 
gf  rcrally  acknowledged  ;  that  being  the  m'wif  ration  which 
wcis  to  be  >\~xe  away,  to  make  room  fy:  that  which  was  to  rtr 
ratlin  :  fo  that  I  could  not  tell  how  to  conceive  of  the  gofpel- 
church  incorporated  with  the  Jev  ifl  ,  fcbey  Lei  'g  always  ie- 
■pr  el  en  ted  as  dLftindt,  or  diitir.guifcabie  one  from  the  o'hu. 

By  the  root  bhen  I  underltood  Air  ah  am —  I'y  the  branches 
his  natural  offepring — By  the  wild  olive  the  Gent 'la  in  a  nam- 


[      23      ] 

rai  itate  ;  who  upon  receiving  the  grace  of  G-od  became  the 
fpiritual  branches  of  Abraham  the  father  of  the  faithful :  and 
were  equally  inrerelted  with  his  believing  natural  branches,  ia 
all  the  fpecial  privileges  of  the  covenant  of  grace. 

This  I  thought  to  be  the  rncti  natural  fenfe  of  the  text  ? 
nor  could  I  fee  how  this  could  have  any  relation  to  Bapuim, 
whether  of  the  adult  or  infants. 

The  next  reference  to  Eaptifm  I  found,  I  Cor.  x.  i,  2. 
I  -could  not  that  you fioould  be  ignorant,  how  that  all  our  father  s- 
were  under  the  cloud,  and  all pajfed  through  the  fea,  and  tuere  all 

'  t'-zed  unto  Mofes,  in  the  cloud,  arhain  the  fea. 

To  underftand  this  I  thought  it  proper  to  enquire  into  the" 
faff,  as  recorded  by  Mofes,  which  I  thought  would  give 
light  to  the  allufion. 

And  in  Exod.  xiv.  19.  we  are  told  the  pillar  of  the  cloud went 
from  hcfr>re  the  face  of  the  Ifraelites,  and  flood  behind  them  ;  thai 
h  came  betiueen  the  camp  of  the  Egyptians  and  the  camp^oflfrael, 
and  it  was  a  cloud  and  darhnefs  to  the  one,  and  gave  light  by 
night  to  the  other.  And  that  the  Lord  caufed  the  fea  to  go  back 
by  ajlrong  eafl  wind  all  that  night,  and  made  the  fea  dry  land  : 
and  the  children  o/Tfrael  went  into  the  midfl  of  the  fea  upon  dry 
"  ground,  and  the  waters  -were  a  wall  unto  them,  on  the  right  hand 
and  left. 

Here  I  found  that  part  of  the  cloud  which  was  next  to  the 
Ifraelites  was  bright;  clear,  and  comfortable  ;  nor  the  lead: 
intimation  of  rain  falling  upon  them.  The  fea  was  made  dry 
ground,  and  the  waters  were  a  wall  unto  them,  on  the  right 
hand,  and  on  the  left ;  fo  that  I  concluded,  the  term  baptized 
mu'!:  refer  to  their  fitua' ion  in  the  midlt  cfthe  fea,  encompaf- 
fed  by  thefe  wails,  and  attended  with  the  cloud,  rather  than' 
to  any  water  coining  out  of  the  one,  or  fprinkling  dafhings 
from  the  other  ;  which  mull  have  been  very  troubiefome,  to 
fuch  a  body  of  people  in  their  march  ;  and  as  I  thought  in- 
cunliltent  with  the  account  of  their  landing  in,  and  coming 
out  of  the  fea  on  d  y  ground. 

This  brought  me  to  the  \a(\  place  offcripture,  which  fpeaks 
directly  to  the  nature  and  meaning  of  the  ordinance  of  Bap- 
tifm  :  1  Pet.  iii.  2c,  21.  The  long-fujfeting  of  God  waited  in 
the  days  of  Noah  while  the  ark  was  preparing  :  wherein  few, 
tha  Weie  find  ly    water*'     The   like  fgure 


[     24     J 

ivhcreunto,  even  bafifm,  doth  alfo  nowfave  us,  (not  the  putting 
away  of the  Jilth  of  the  flefh,  but  the  anjiver  of  a  good  confer- 
ence towards  God)  by  the  refurreclion  of  jfefus  Chrifi. 

Here  it  appeared  that  there  were  fome  circumftances  atten- 
ding the  ark,  and  the  falvation  of  Noah  and  his  family  by 
water,  which  were  figurative  or  typical  of  Baptifm  ;  and 
when  I  examined  the  account  as  given  by  Mojcs,  Gen.  vii. 
I  found  it  ftood  thus  :  The  ark  was  God's  contrivance  and 
appointment,  and  it  was  a  large  hollow  veffel,  in  which 
Noah  and  his  family,  and  the  creatures  with  him,  were  for 
a  time  as  it  were  buried  ;  and  efpecially  this  was  the  cafe, 
when  the  fountains  of  the  great  deep  were  broken  up,  and 
the  windows  of  heaven  were  opened,  and  they  in  the  midft 
of  the  deluge,  which  deftroyed  all  the  world.  This  appeared 
to  me  to  anfwer  to  immerfion  in  Baptifm  ;  and  I  could  not 
think  the  Holy  Ghoft  would  refer  us  to  the  water  of  a  flood, 
as  a  type  of  a  little  quantity  of  that  element,  made  ufe  of  when 
poured  or  fpiinkled  on  the  face  of  an  infant.  And  as  Noah 
and  his  family  were  laved  by  water  ;  the  believer  is  faved  by 
Baptifm,  not  efneacioufly  or  meritorioufly,  but  declaratively 
and  infhumentally.  In  the  profeffion  of  his  faith,  he  declares 
his  entrance  into  Chrifl  as  the  ark  of  falvation ;  and  his  baptifm 
is  a  lively  reprefentation  of  the  burial  and  refurreclion  of  him, 
who  died  for  his  offences,  and  rofe  again  for  his  juftification. 

Andes  Noah  built  the  ark,  and  entered  into  it  in  obedi- 
ence to  the  command  of  God  ;  the  believer  is  baptized  from 
a  principle  of  confc'ience  towards  God  :  yea  a  good,  that  is,  as 
I  thought,  an  enlightened,  renewed  confeience. 

Having  thus  gone  through  the  fcripture  account  of  tbe  ordi- 
nance of  Baptifm,  I  found  nayfelf  obliged  to  conclude  the 
balance  was  greatly  on  the  fide  of  adult  believers,  as  the  only 
mode  ofthatfacred  inftitution. 

I  well  knew  that  many  godly  and  learned  perfons  thought 
©iherwife  ;  but  not  daring  to  call  any  man  maiter  on  earth, 
and  remembering  the  account  I  mult  fhortly  give  to  him,  who 
faid,  thus  it  becometh  us  to  fulfil  all  right ecufnefs  ;  I  determined 
to  comply  with  my  duty  :  and  on  the  clofell  reitec"tion,  have 
feeii  no  reafon  to  repent  of  it. 

JLnil  of  Tie  Reprefentation. 


.  RUTHERFORD'S 
Convictions  and  Exer cites  of  Mind, 


j 

RESPECTING    THE 

INVALIDITY 

O  F 

INFANT- BAPTlS  M. 


HRISTIANITY  is  a  Divine  Revelation,  not 
only  calculated  for  the  bed:  purpofes,  namely,  the  glory  of 
God-,  the  encouragement  of  iinners,  and  the  confolation  of 
Ifrael ;  but  is  in  all  refpeJts  ilrifrly  confident  and  truly  im- 
portant;  nor  can  it  be* otherwise,  feeing  God  is  its  author, 
object  and  end.  Therefore,  if  our  religicais  principles  ex- 
actly coincide  with  the  holy  fcriptures,  we  need  not  fcruple 
to  declare  them  ;  and  if  at  any  time  they  appear  contrary  to 
that  only  rule,   let  us  not  be  afliamed  to  renounce  them. 

In  two  fermons  I  publilhed  in  i  758,  on  Believers9  Bap- 
tifm,  I  have  fpoken  my  mind  pretty  freely,  refpecuing  the  mode 
and  fubjefts  of  baptifm  ;  but  having  been  fometime  ago  of  a 
different  judgment,  mail  give  a  brief  account  of  the  begin- 
ning of  my  fcruples  about  the  validity  of  infant-baptifm — my 
e:iercife  of  mind  during  the  enquiry — the  oppofition  I 
v/iLh  when  determined — and  the  manner  of  my  becoming 
.inted  with,  and  joining  the  Bap 

I   was  b:>rn  in  the  North  of  Eujland,  and  educated  in  the 
Prejbyterian  perfuafun,   in  which  I  was  njt  more  ftricl  Lhan 

C 


L      26      ] 

uncharitable,  efteeming  that  church  the  pureft  upon  earth, 
and  concluding  all  other  denomination's  in  a  dark  and  im- 
itate. But  when,  intrufions  *  became  frequent  in  Scotland, 
1  determined  to  look  more  narrowly  into  the  confiitution  of 
the  church  :  and  after  as  elbfe  and  impartial  a  fearch,  as  my 
rtunities  and  prejudices  would  at  that  time  admit,  couid 
not  help  thinking  the  ind  government  moft  agreeable 

to  the  nature  of  the  New  Teitament  worfhip.  But  though 
this  conviction  did  not  terminate  in  a  refolution  to  break  off 
from  my  own  community,  yet  it  took  down  the  fire  edge  of 
a  narrow,  bigotted  fpirit,  and  produced  a  more  generous  turn 
of  mind  tcv/ciids  good  people  of  all  perfuafions,  which  blef- 
fed  be  God,  to  this  day,  hath  never  been  contracted,  but 
more  and  mere  enlarged. 

In  1752,  being  at  the  Latin  School  in  Jedburgh,  a  little 
market-town  in  the  South  of  Scotland,  where  it  was  cuf- 
tomary  for  two  or  three  of  the  moil  advanced  dalles  to  repeat 
part  of  Mr.  Vincent's  Catechifm  every  Monday  morning,  the 
anfwer  to. the  following  queilion  fell  to  my  lot : 

"  What  is  fi  gnificd,  fealed,  and  engaged  on  God's  part, 
by  our  being  baptized  in  his  name  ? 

"  There  is  (ignified,  fealed,  and  engaged  on  God's  part, 
by  our  being  baptized  in  his  name,  1.  His  ingrafting  us  into 
Chrift.  2.  His  making  us  partakers  of  the  be&efits  of  the 
New  Covenant." 

Early  on  the  Lord's  Day  morning,  as  I  was  walking  in 
the  fields,  coniidcring  the  repetition  the  mailer  had  affigned 
the  day  before,  in  order  to  fix  it  in  my  memory,  which  was 
my  ufual  method,  this  anfwer  (truck  me  with  fome  degree 
oiflurprife,  rind  led  me  to  reafon  upon  it  in  the  following 
rner  :  I  fir  grafting  into  Chrifl,  and  infuring  a  title  to  the 
rfits  of  he  New  Covenant,  be  (ignified,  feakd,  and  enga- 
ged on  God's  part,  by  our  being  baptized  in  his  name  ;  how 
comes  it  to  pais  that  numbers  who  have  been  baptized  in  the 
name  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  to  all  outward  appearance,  live 
and  die  without  an  intered  in  thefe  difUnguifhecj  bleflings  ; 
for  God  will  furely  fulfil  every  engagement  to  which  he  lets 
his  leal  \ 

-  That  is,  when  a  mi  '  }'  to 

oil  oi  the  pari 


[       27       ] 

It   was  quite   natural  for  me  to  draw  fuch  a  coticlufion, 
becauie,  prior  to  he  Loid  had  enabled  my  foul  to  caft 

the  anchor  of  Its  hope  in  she  fulnefs  and  fkithfi  inefs  of  hi 

felf,  and  in   the  fore  and  !e   nature  oi'  the   cove- 

nant of  grace  ;  and  that  in  a  high  (term  of  deep  diiircfs,  for 
want  of  the  knowledge  of  an  intereit  in  Chrift,  the  one  thing 
needful,  Luke  x.  42.°  At  firft,  I  only  fufpeckd  the  author's 
do£triue,  with  regard  to  the  faitliiulneft  of  Geo,  and  the  ita- 
bility  of  his  covenant ;  but  ccmiidering  what  he  farther  cb- 
ferves  of  the  engagement  on  our  part,  began  to  queinon 
dier  he  did  not  miftake  the  nature  and^end  of  baptifm — ■ 
His  words  arc, 

"  By  our  being  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghoft,  is  foaled  and  engaged  on  our  part,  that  we 
will  be  the  Lord's,  and  that  1.  wholly,  foul  and  body,  and 
with  all  our  powers,  faculties  and  members,  are  to  be  em- 
ployed by  him  as  inftruments  of  righieoafnefs  and  new  obedi- 
ence ;  and  2.  only  the  Lord's,  and  therefore  we  engage  to 
renounce  the  fervice  of  the  devil,  and  the  fie  fa,  and  the 
world,  and  light  under  Ghrift's  banner  againft  thefe  enemies 
of  the  Lord  and  of  our  fouls  " 

Poring  upon  thefe  things,   and  reviewing  all  that  P'wcent 
fays  upon  the  fubjerT,  found  i:  alferted, — "  That  the  benefits 
of  the  covenant   of  grace,     which  by  baptifm  we  2 re  made 
ikers  of,   are,  Admifiion    into  the   vifible  church — Re« 
on  of  fins  by  (Thrift's  blood — Regeneration  and  fade" 
Qn.  by, ChriftV  Spirit — Adop  rwith  o 

unto  Chrift — and    F  to    everiaitinp-   lite."      I  ob~ 

■d,  the    Wejiminjier  in    the   larger   catechiun, 

:dy  concurred  with  thefe  fehtiments,  and   therefore  con- 
cluded they  muit  be  true.      But  then    I   coald    not  account 
how  thefe  benfefos  were   conferred  upon  infants  by  baptifm, 
rig  I  had  experienced  thlofe   rich  bleffings  iiowing  to  my 
;  through  a  d  channel,  namely,  by  the  operation  of 

iritin  th  .  YW\  ex.  3. 

For  having  feen  myfelf  .  -  in  the 

vV,   Eph.  ii,  12.    ,  itheknoiplti 

rtmiflicn  o/Jtns,  Luke  i.  77.  tmd  obtained  faith  to  cry  /Ma 
Farh-.-r,  Gal.  iv.  6.  above  twenty  years  after  my  1  iptifra,  con- 
cluded thefe  favours  were  never  bellowed  that  way. 


: 

enquiring,  is  poinb: 

;   or 

ovcment  of  it  r. 
Tl\  ■  0  me,  was  quite 

:  I  had  never  cloiel]  .   the  tru< 

ort  of  the  ordinance,  reap  beneht  by  reflection, 

fecmed  a  little  imp  pfe,    being  incapable   of 

fpiritual  views,  and  perfonal  engagements  at  the  time,  there 
appeared  ncthing  material  to  reflect  upon  relative  to  a  tranf- 
bich  I  was  never  confcioufly  engaged  ;  therefore 
often  thought,  had  I  not  been  baptized  before,  how  fweet 
^d .  :.:  the  ordinance  might  be  now  !    For  I  could  eo 

to  my  n:iniiler,  as  our  Saviour  did  to  J.  :lf  a 

%   cjid  rejoice  in  him  that  fanedfied  the  water. — And 
-  began  my  Temples    concerning   the  validity   of  infant- 
be    method   I  tcok  to    have   mv  doubts  removed,  was 
ictiy  to  ffarch  into  what  Vmcent,  together  with  the 
he  Larger  and  Shorter  Catechifms  fav 
.  but  thefe  fell  fo  far  fhort  of  yielding  the  fatis- 
i  for,  tl:  :':A  not  fail  to  ir.creafe  my    t 

bag  not  c:  .  di- 

itc    :.     U  ,    rcafon    and  experience.      For, 

61  the  t;.  the 

:n  •"*   and  yet  tl 
ts  to  be  admi  .     This  I  could 

reconcile  ;    for  if  they  are   a  part  of  the  vifible 

dic- 
tion to  fay,  they  em  •   and  it  < 

lQU. 

.  ■■  t  to  he 

Lorc;:  -  hew  a  child's 

h,  with    all  other  graces,  can    be  frrengtbened  and   ir> 

creafed,"i"    feeing    children  have  neither  faith  nor  grace,   in 

-   the  A:  .    as  is  clear  from  the  tenth 

ter  of  the  Ct  -.,  andti  booD^r- 

tu.ii  in  the  L  .      Foi  all  ;-.:  .red 


*-    C-  .  I    ::h,  chap. 


r  ^9  : 

to  be  in  a  irate  of  Gn  and  death,  till  :  Jled  by 

Word  and  Spirit  of  God. 

I   had  frequently   beard,   and    aa  often   condemned  the 

church  of  Enjiand,  for  an  "  infant  b  ■ 

a  member  of  Chriit,  a   child  of  G  I   of 

the    kingdom  of  heaven,  by  baptifm  ;"   but  now  fc 
own  church,  in  effect,  faid  the  very  .       . 
Catechifm,  in  the  defcription  of  ,  cut,  defines  i:,  "  an 

holy   ordinance,    inftituted  by  Chrilr,   1  by  fed 

f  gns,  Chriir.  and  the  benefits  of  the  new 
fented,  fealed,  and  applied  to  belie v 

The  plain  and  obvious  meaning  .  words  apt  c 

me  in  this  light,  that  Chriit  and  f  the  new  cove- 

nant were   reprefented,  fealed  arid  applied  to  1.  t,  by 

the  feniible  Ggnsin  baptifm  and  the  Lord5 
as  we  ufed  baptifm  in  inline  v,   I  was  at  a  great  lofs  to  k 
in  what  fenfe  infants  could  be  termed  bel  -    I 

ever  received   f-  n  in  das  point.      At  lei 

dering  there  is  no  other  outward  an_  :  rign  in 

but  pure  water,  which  not  being  again  appfiec 
is  blefied  with  divine  faith,  concluded,   either  :he  d 
did  not  refpect  baptifm,  or  intended,  that  th 
conferred   upon  infants  by  the    outward  element,   1 
rather  more  exceptionable  than  what  we  fo  fi 
in  cur  lifter  church,  and  to  me  a  glaring  proof  ot  our  own 

iftency  ;  for  elfewhere  v-  .  i  "  to  b  2 

of  the  redemption  purchafed  by  Chriit,  by  the  en 
cation  of  it  to  us  by  the  Holy  Spirit."*  And  this  to  be 

done  "  by  working   faith  in  i   there:  s   i.o 

Chriil  in  ooj  B-"*     *-  tkeri 

of  thefe  benefits^  by  the  feniible  fign  in  t  .  then  nc 

the  Spirit  of  Chriit  in  cur  eifecrual  calling;  but  if  by  th 
and  Spirit  cf  (Thrift  in   c  ::al  calling,  then  not  b*. 

feniible  fign  i  na.      This  can  never  be  reconciled.  T 

.t  I  had  formerly  efteemed  c. 
involved  me  in  the 
1  ion  of  I  i'ers,  the   r  ofe- 

oaencc  at  their  -  .0  be 

*   SI  Sm. 

C  4 


[     3o     ] 

corifidered  believers,  the  water  applied  afrerti  when  faith  is 
obtained,  or  the  ordinance  to  be  deferred,  till  the  fubjects 
are  born  from  above. 

Upcm  this  the  exercifes  of  my  mind  began  to  be  weighty  ; 
1'  ;;  remembering  how  ufeful  the  reading  of  the  fcriptures  had 
been  when  I  was  groaning  fr  redemption,  and  waiting  for  the 
itioh  of  the  fons  of  God.    Rom.  viii.  19,  23.  refolved 
to  enquire  into  the  New  Teftament  with   the   greatefl  dili- 
gence and  impartiality.     The  method  I  took  was  to  read  it 
over  and  over,  and   carefully  remark  every  pafTage,   which 
directly  or  implicitly  regarded  the  ordinance.      And  for  about 
larter  of  a  year,  every  frefh  perrfal  produced  new  eviden- 
infant-baptifei  ;    but  though   many  places  bore 
mind  with  fome  degree  of  conviction,  yet  three  par.. 
determined  my  judgment.      And, 
j.  7  he  hour  tehtieth,  and  new  is,   when  the  true  wojhippirj 
iii  fpirit  and  in  truth;  for  the  Father 
.'.  John  iv.  23. 
.  From  thefe  words  I   conceived,  that  the  true  and  proper 
of  the  New  Te.  .  is  to  be  performed  in  fpirit 

hi  baptifm  to  be  a  foiemn  part 

Hip,  concluded  therefore,  that  infants  could  not 

,1  their  own  fpirits,   nor  pi  be  ordinance 

■  ler  the  influences  of  the  Spirit  of  Chriit  ;   come- 

rauft  be  in.'  .bjects  for  baptifm. 

2.    ■'.  I  '    tofjlble  ic  plettfe  Ccd.   Keb,  xi.  6. 

s    I  could  not   apprehend  that  the  parents,  or  fureties 

con]  neither  could  I  learn  how  the 

...  cov-id   have   faith    for  itfelf,  becaufe  Faith  cometh  by 

Romi  x.  17.  there- 
fore, ss  an  infant  a  . .  e  iiith,  and  it  is  irnpoiiible  to 
pleafe  G(                          he  baptifm '6f  infants  cannot  be  right? 

,    Rom.  xiv.  23. 
;.  ...  ,;,  doth  alfo  novo 

r     i       .  ...  of  the  fiefh,  hut  the 

rds    God)  by  the  ref 
:  1 . 

•  'he  fiibje&s  of 
muft  have    tl  good  confeience  towards 

ikied 


L     3i     ] 

from  an  ev'il  confckncc,  Heb.  x.  22.  but  alio  a  full  perfuafion, 
that  the  ordinance  was  appointed  by  God,  to  figure  forth  a 
finifhed  falvation  by  the  refurre&ion  of  Jefus  Chrift.  But  as 
infants  cannot  have  fuch  a  confcious  impreflion,  'concluded, 
thev  were  very  improper  fubjecls  of  baptifm. 

Being  now  pretty  well  fatisfied,  that  believers  were  the 
mod:  proper  Subjects  of  Baptifm,  I  proceeded  to  examine 
the  Mode.  The  texts  produced  by  Vincent,  and  the  affembly 
of  divines,  to  prove  dipping  unnecefTary,  and  that  fprinkling 
was  fufficient,  are  fo  foreign  to  the  purpofe,  that  I  immedi- 
ately concluded  the  caufe  muft  be  dark,  where  the  proofs 
were  fo  weak.  My  fuipence  therefore  about  this  matter  did 
not  long  continue  ;  for  as  we  generally  allowed  dipping  to 
have  been  the  primitive  mode,  I  judged  a  departure  from 
that  practice  unwarrantable  ;  and  as  it  agrees  with  the  mofr. 
natural,  ligniricant,  and  expreffive  import  of  the  word,  it 
was  fafeft,  and  quite  juftifiable  to  abide  by  that  cuftom. 

The  next  thing  that  came  before  me,  was  a  ftrong  incli- 
nation to  be  acquainted  with  feme  of  the  other  principles  of 
fuch  as  practifed  adult  baptifm  by  immerfion.  But  when  I 
came  to  examine  the  word  in  various  dictionaries,  which 
diitinguifhes  that  perfuafion,  found  the  poor  Anabapt\fts  tra- 
duced as  a  feci  of  heretics,  who  generally  held  a  fyftem  of 
rnonftrous  opinions.  This  gave  me  a  great  damp  at  iirit.  fet- 
ting  out;  but,  after  fome  reafoning  upon  the  fubjecl,  conclu- 
ded, their  erroneous  fentiments  in  other  points,  did  not 
prove  them  mifiaken  reflecting  baptifm.  And  in  a  fhort 
time,  I  met  with  a  more  favorable  account  of  the  EngiijbBap- 
tiftsf  in  Pardon's  dictionary,  namelv,  "  That  they  differ 
from  other  protefiants  in  little  more  than  the  not  baptizing 
children,  as  appears  by  a  confeflion  of  faith,  pubiifhed  by  the 
reprefentatives  of  above  one  hundred  of  their  congregations, 
in  1689." 

This  account  gave  great  relief  to  my  mind,  and  did  not 
more  re]oice  than  furprife,  by  the  mention  of  fuch  a  number 
of  churches  in  England.  Nor  did  it  Jail  to  fet  me  a  lor« 
for  a  fight  of  this  confeflion  of  faith,  or  any  other  Bapitjl 
book  on  the  particular  fubject,  which  denominates  that  pro- 
>n.  The  fiiit  that  I  could  obtain,  was  Mr.  Wilfotfs 
Scripture   Manual,  a  treatife  quite  fealonable,  which  added 


[     3*     3 

great  flrength  to  my  mind,  and  fupport  to  my  new  fentiment ; 
for  that,  book,  in  my  efteem,  is  as  concife,  clear  and  con- 
clusive as  any  I  have  yet  feen  upon  the  fubjecl:. 

After  this,  my  inclination  for  the  ordinance,  and  ac- 
quaintance with  the  people  called  Baptifls,  greatly  increafed: 
and  as  our  fchool  always  broke  up  for  the  harveit,  refolved, 
when  I  returned  to  my  father's  in  England,  to  vifit  fome  of 
the  Bapi'tfl  congregations.  But  after  confidering  the  opposi- 
tion I  was  likely  to  meet  with,  became  much  difcouraged. 
However,  I  wrote  to  my  father,  informing  him  of  my  change 
of  principles,  and  gave  a  diflant  hint  of  my  intentions.  This 
being  about  the  latter  end  of  the  fpring,  thought  we  would 
have  fome  time  to  reafon  the  point  at  a  diflance  ;  but  foon 
found  my  letter  had  kindled  fuch  a  fire  of  refentment,  as 
would  be  hard  for  me  to  endure  at  my  return  :  therefore  con- 
ceived it  would  be  bell:  to  diimifs,  or  at  lead  conceal  my  new 
opinion.  But  it  was  impracticable  to  palliate  what  I  had 
already  mentioned,  without  manifeft  difiimulation,  therefore 
wifhed  it  might  appear  that  my  new  fentiment  was  really  an 
error,  and  my  compliance  fo  far  merely  a  temptation.  This 
led  me  to  review  the  point,  with  fome  degree  of  refolution, 
being  determined,  if  poflible,  to  have  full  fatisfaclion.  But 
cne  morning,  my  mind  was  fo  irrangely  affected,  that  all  the 
powers  thereof  were  fhaken  and  confounded,  as  I  was  read- 
ing thefe  words  :  Becaufe  they  received  not  the  love  of  the  truth, 
that  they  might  be  faved  $  God  fhall  fend  them  aflrcng  delvjlon, 
that  they  jhould  believe  a  lie ;  that  they  all  might  be  damned,  ivhp 
believe  not  the  truth.  2  Thef.  ii.  io,  n,  12.  The  manner  in. 
which  this  fcripture  operated,  was,  in  producing  a  fufpence 
about  my  happy  ftate  ;  for  I  was  tempted  to  believe,  that  I 
had  r;Ot  received  the  love  of  God  in  truth,  which  had  occafi- 
oned  him  to  fend  this  flrong  delufon,  in  caufing  me  to  believe 
fuch  a  lie,  refpecting  Baptifm.  And  as  it  was  only  about  half 
a  year  before,  that  I  had  obtained  the  witnefs  of  peace  and 
pardon,  it  bore  the  weightier  upon  my  mind.  For  fome  time,. 
therefore,  I  looked  on  baptifm  as  an  indifferent  matter  ;  and 
all  my  thoughts  refpec"ting  it  being  difmifled,  the  whole  bent 
of  my  defires  were  engaged  in  earned  addreifes  to  God,  for 
a  frefh  and  full  evidence  of  my  intercft  in  Chrifl ;  which,  bell 
ofblefiings,  he.  foon  granted,  to  the  unfpeakabie  joy  of  my 


[     33     ] 

heart.  I  then  formed  a  refblution,  to  dimr.b  my  peac« 
niui  e  with  perplexing  thoughts  on  baptiim  ;  but  reft  fatisfltd 
with  the  fweet  afmrance  of  Chrift's  loyc.  "However,  Con- 
dons refpeclir.g  the  folemmty  of  that  .on,  and  the 
.light  I  had  received  into  the  fabject  perpetually  purfued  me  ; 
and  thouah  fevcrai  times  I  had  come  to  a  determination,  to 
remain  entirely  fatisfied  with  the  baptifm  I  had  received  in 
my  infancy,  .let  the  effect  be  what  it  would,  was  at  length 
ftiinciently  roufed  from  this  indolent  indifferency  by  thefe 
words  :  He  that  knows  his  Lord's  Will,  and  does  not  acl  ac- 
cording to  it,  Jhall  be  beaten  with  many  Jiripes.  Luke  xii.  47. — 
And  he  that  loveth  father  or  mother  more  than  me,  u  not  worthy 
of  me.   Matt.  x.  37. 

Having  therefore  made  as  critical  a  fearch  into  the  New 
Teftament,  as  my  capacity  would  admit,  and  not  being  able 
to  difcover  the  moft  diftant  hint  from  precept  or  precedent,  in 
favour  of  infant  baptifm,  concluded,  had  that  practice  been 
the  will  of  God,  its  divine  author itv  would  never  have  been 
left  fo  exceeding  dark  and  obfeure.  And  befides,  it  did  not 
only  appear  quite  unfcriptural,  but  in  the  very  nature  of 
the  thing,  vaftly  abfurd  ;  for  every  branch  of  New  Tefta- 
ment worfhip  is  to  be  performed  in  iaith,  in  fpirit,  and  in 
truth  ;  and  baptifm  is  undoubtedly  as  folemn  a  part  of  that 
worfhip,  as  any  other  chriitian  duty  or  ordinance;  confe- 
quently,  it  is  moft  irrational  to  fuppofe,  that  infants  have 
any  concern  in  holy  baptifm. 

But  though  my  mind  was  now  relieved  from  all  its  fcruplea 
rjfpetling  the  truth  of  believers'  baptifm,  yet  hc-.v  I  ft  00  Id 
v/ithftand  the  oppofuion  of  friends,  (till  remained  a  diflreffing 
difficulty.  I  continued  therefore  in  this  diimrbed  way,  till 
near  the  harveft,  when  it  was  evident  either  God  or  man.  mult 
be  obeyed ;  but  I  determined  to  comply  with  my  convictions, 
and  leave  the  ilTue  with  the  Lord. 

What  greatly  encouraged  me  in  this,  was  a  deep  fenfe  of 
what  Chiiii  had  done  for  me,  and  wrought  in  me,  together 
with  a  firm  belief  of  the  account  to  be  given  before  him  in  a 
little  time.  I  returned,  theiefure,  to  England,  with  earned 
defires  for  an  acquaintance  with  die  Bapti/Is,  and  fully  refol- 
ved,  by  the  grace  of  God,  to  put  my  defigns  into  practice ; 
but  my  fears  were  great,  and  my  reafonings  many  ;  thinking 


[     34     J 

it  a  hard  matter  to  expofe  nr  tment  of 

thofe  whom  I  fo  dearly  loved  and  regarded  ;  and  fearing,  leit 
the  principles  and  practices  of  night  pn  Tee- 

able  to  me,  or  unacceptable  to  them.  But  having  heard,  be- 
fore I  left  Scotland,  that  an  im  riend  of  mioe  *  had 
joined  'himfelf  to  a  Bcpf\jl  church,  a  little  fouth  from  Hexfaasi, 
purpofed  iirfr.  to  fee  him,  from  whom  I  expected  a  full  ac- 
count of  the  people. 

At  cur  interview,  among  other  things,  he  told  me  he  was 
to  be  at  a  church-meeting  the  Saturday  fevennight  following; 
for  it  was  but  feldom  he  could  go*,  as  he  lived  at  a  great  cui- 
tance  from  the  place  ;  I  promlled  to  meet  him  there,  if  my 
father's  permiiTion  could  be  obtained. 

It  is  fomewhat  remarkable,  that  after  I  opened  my  mind 
fully,  my  mother  never  appeared  againft  me  ;  nor  did  my 
elded  brother  (of  whom  I  was  much  afraid)  ever  fpeak  to 
me  upon  the  fubject.  My  father,  together  with  an  uncle, 
were  the  only  relatives  who  appeared  in econcileable.  How- 
ever, I  accomplished  the  uromjfe  made  to  my  friend,  by  con- 
cealing my  intentions  as  much  as  poilible. 

I  got  to  the  place5f  on  the  evening  appointed,  and  found 
Mr.  Hall  was  not  come  ;  however,  the  kindnefs  of  the  peo- 
ple did  abundantly  compenfate  for  that  difappointment  ;  for, 
contrary  to  all  expectation,  I  .was  immediately  admitted  into 
their  church-meeting,  and,  to   my  great  fatisfaclion,  found 

there  were  two  perfons  to  be  baptized  the  fame  evening. 

This  put  me  in  mind,  how  providentially  Abraham's  fcrvant 

had  been  conduced,   G'eh,  xxiv.  12.  and  as  my  pray. 

in  fome  reflects,  correspondent  with  his,  hoped  1  might  meet 

.  *  This  was  one  Robert  Hall,  who  is  now  amir.ifber  at  Arrfby,  in 
Leicefterfnire,  and  brother  to  Mr.  Chriftcpher  Hail,  the  Baptift  mini- 
fter  iir "Whitehaven. 

f  It  is   called  Juniper-Dye-Houfe,  about  four  miles  fouth  of  Hex- 
ham, in  what  is  vulgarly  diftin^uiihed  by  ne  of  HexhamJ 
The  practice  of  this  ci  Kvcb,  is  to  meet  on  the  Saturday  before  trey 
receiv;  the  ].■                           which  is  once   in   two  months  ;  not 
to  fettle  their    churcjh                  n  outward  matters,  and  hear  fuch  as 
propofe   themfelves   for  baptifrn  ;  but  to  enquire  whether  a  low  to 

Chrift  and  one  another  prevails,  and  to  pray  fcr  the  prefence  of  God 
in  the  ibiemnity  before  them  :    a  practice  truly   kudabie  and  pr&ife- 

vvcr::  y. 


[     35     ] 

with  the  fame  fuccefs,   Gen.  xxiv.  27.  and  having  never  be- 
fore heard  any  relate  the  dealings  of  God  with  their  fouls, 
it  was   a  moving   meeting   to   me.     The    church    declared 
their  approbation  of  the  candidates,  and  defired  them  to  pre- 
pare for  baptifni ;  one  of  whom  (food  up,  and  made  a  moil: 
ting  requeft — intreating  all  prefent  to  pray  for  a  blemng 
Upon  the  oceafion — that  by  grace  they  might  be  enabled  to 
agreeably  to  the  gofpel — and  at   lad  finifh  their  courfe 
with  joy  and  triumph.     This  fo  melted  my  heart,  as  it  had 
never  been  before  at  any  oilier  part  of  worfhip  ;  nor  could  I 
help   reflecting  within  myfelf — What  a   dead,  formal,    un- 
mc  ming  thing,  is  the  preferring  of  an  infant  for  baptifm,  when 
compared- with  this!   And,  beiides,  the  minifter's*  difcourfe 
at  the  river  fide,  together  with  his  prayer  before  and  after  the 
administration,  were  fo  powerful  and  pertinent,  that  I  fecretly 
wifhed  ail  my  acquaintances  prefent. 

When  the  folemnity  was  over,  one  afked  me  what  I 
thought  of  their  method  ;  and  being  inclined  to  oppofe  it  for 
fome  time,  to  fee  what  they  had  to  fay  for  their  practice,  was 
furprifed  to  find  them  advance  the  fame  arguments  again  ft  me,  . 
which  had  formerly  determined  my  judgment,  when  far  from 
every  Baptift.  I  had  refolved  with  myfelf,  not  to  join  them 
fuddenly  ;  but  the  clear  views  and  fweet  enjoyments  my  foul 
had  been  indulged  with,  during  the  administration  of  the  ordi- 
nance, the  information  received  from  Robert,  Halt,  and  the 
preiling  found  of  thefe  words,  Afts  xxii.  16.  Why  tarr'iejl 
thou  P  produced  another  way  of  thinking  ;  and  fo  opened  my 
mind.  It  was  fomewhat  particular,  that  all  the  while  I  could 
dly  forbear  crying  out,    What  h'mdereth  me  to  be  baptized  P. 

A;.s  vHi.  36. 

The  next  morning  another  perfon  came  early,  with  an 
intent  to  be  baptized,  which  gave  me  a  fair  opportunity  to 
embrace  what  I  had  fo  earneftly  longed  for  ;  and  our  pro- 
pofals  proving  acceptable,  were  accordingly  baptized.  The 
relation  of  our  experiences  took  up  much  of  the  morning  ;  fo 
that  the  people  were  all  afTembled  for  the  worfhip  of  the  day, 
and  (landing  along  each  fide  of  the  river,  the  oceafion  re- 
minded me  of  the  primitive  baptifms  in  Jordan* 

*  Mr.  David  F  f  that  church. 


Betwixt  the  adminiftration  of  this  ordinance  and  the  Lord's 
Supper,  Mr.  Ferine  preached  twice  from  thefe  words,  Ifdah 
xxv.  6.  In  this  mountain  Jhall  the  Lord  of  Hofls  make  unto  his 
people,  a  feajl  of  fat  things,  a  feafl  of tuine  on  ihe  lees,  of  fit 
things  full  of  marrow,  of  tuine  on  the  lees  well  refined.  After 
which  all  things  were  made  ready  for  the  celebration  of  the 
holy  fupper  ;  and  the  perfons  newly  baptized,  (landing  t* 
in  the  prefence  of  the  people,  were  addreffed  by  the  minifter 
to  the  following  purpofe  :  "  That  as  we  had  made  a  very 
public  and  folemn  profelfion,  it  was  necefTary  to  lay  before 
us,  that  our  converfation  ought  to  be  holy  and  becoming — 
that  the  difficulties  of  a  public  pilgrimage  were  many  and 
great — and  that  the  faithfulnefs  and  fulnefs  of  Jefus  was  am- 
ply fufncient  to  fupport  and  fupply."  And  then  affuring  us 
what  joy  we  adminiftered  to  them,  and  with  what  cordial 
affection  they  received  us,  in  the  name  of  the  church  he  gave 
us  the  right  hand  of  fell oivfljip,  Gal.  ii.  9. 

The  whole  was  conduced  with  fo  much  order  and  firnpli- 
city,  and  attended  with  fuch  a  remarkable  blefling,  as  I  had 
never  been  witnefs  to  before  :  And  as  it  was  a  fealting  feafon 
to  my  foul,  fo  I  flood  in  great  need  of  it ;  for  I  met  with  a 
cool  reception  at  my  return  home.  And  now  began  my 
wildernefs  trials,  being  looked  upon  as  one  who  had  renoun- 
ced the  faith,  and  turned  fool  in  a  frolick. 

One  time,  iate  at  night,  my  father  afked  me  ferioufly,  if 
I  was  really  baptized,  or  whether  the  report  was  groundlefs? 
I  told  him,  it  v/as  ail  truth  ;  upon  which  he  grew  exceeding 
angry,  defined  me  to  leave  his  houfe,  and  be  feen  by  him  no 
i\iore.  I  quietly  walked  out  to  lament  my  hard  fate  ;  but 
clpnfidering  oar  Saviour's  temptations  immediately  after  his 
b&ptifm,  Mat.  iv.  1.  was  led  to  put  up  a  petition  to  this 
purpofe  :  "  O  Lord,  many  perplexed  cafes  have  been  put 
into  thy  hands,  and  thou  haft  brought  order  out  of  them  all  : 
I  refer  this  matter,  with  every  other  affair,  wholly  to  thy 
difpofal,  over-rule  all  for  thy  own  glory,  and  my  advantage/' 
Eff  my  father  was  gone  to  bed,  my  mother  called  me  in, 
and  the  next  morning  his  countenance  was  more  towards  me 
than  at  other  times.  Tbfe  made  me  conclude,  the  Lord  was 
beginning  to  aofwer  my  prayer  ;  and  fo  it  came  to  pafs  ;'  for 
in  a  flaort  time,  a   beloved  coufin   [a  young  man,  the  fon  of 


[     37      . 

my  uncle  already  mentioned,  who  wen  both  men  ot  g 
abilities,    trick  piety,    and  died    near  to  one   another,  loon 
after]  was  the  nappy  inftrument  of  turning  my  father's  heart; 

which  put  .an  end  to  all  it:-,  troubles  from  that  quarter. 

Returning  again  to  Scotland,  i  deiigned  to  conceal  my  ien- 
timents  from  friends  in  that  place,  imagining,  to  {peak  of 
them  might  rather  be  hurtful  than  otherwife.  But  in  Ids  than 
half  a  year,  fome  perfon  hearing  the  matter,  at  Newcaftie, 
upon  Tync,  all  came  to  light.  My  friends  in  Jedburgh  feem- 
ed  to  vent  themfelves  in  furprize,  but  not  by  way  of  fpleen 
and  refentment ;  therefore  had  nothing  to  undergo  here,  only 
what  fome  would  cali  the  fhame  and  fcandal  of  the  thing. 
And,  indeed,  the  renouncing  of  my  baptifmal  covenant  (as 
they  called  it)  was  looked  upon  to  be  a  very  ftrange  piece 
of  conduct,  an  inftance  whereof  had  not  been  known,  in  thefe 
parts,  in  the  memory  of  man.  But  to  give  a  fall  detail  would 
be  quite  tedious,  mall  therefore  leave  the  candid  reader  to 
judge,  what  I  mud  have  undergone  in  a  courfe  of  fuch  variety 
of  exercifes. 

I  (hall  therefore  conclude,  by  informing  the  reader,  that 
all  the  exercife  of  mind  I  underwent,  and  the  oppolition  I 
met  with,  were  not  to  be  compared  with  the  peace  and  tran- 
quility of  foul  I  enjoyed,  by  complying  with  my  convictions, 
and  following  the  Shepherd's  voice  :  Nor  have  I  ever  re- 
peated, but  often  rejoiced,  for  the  change  of  my  principles. 


End  of  the  Exercifes. 


D 


TESTIMONY 


O  F 


Divers  Learned  Psedobaptiifc 


AS  no  pei  Tons  are  difpcfed  to  make  voluntary  and  delibe- 
rate conceflions,  in  direct  oppofition  to  their  ov/n  avow- 
ed practice,  without  the  mod  fatisfaelory  evidences  in 
favour  of  thofe  who  differ  from  them,  the  Editor  offers 
the  following  TefHmonies  to  confideraticn  : 

Teftimonies  hi  favour  of  Believers9  Baitifm, 

C.  Si.  DU  VEIL,  'D.  D. 

V  v' .  IT  H  great  approbation,  quotes  'Jus 

!o,   who  fays,   "You  mult  obferve,   that  in  the  primitive 

times  the  ordinance  of  baptjfm  was  only  a'dihinifterecl  to  thofe, 

.v/ho  through  pcrfeciiun  of  body  and  mind  had  attained  to  this, 

that  they  knew  what  profit  thqy   received  by  tjaptifm,  what 

rofefled,  wfiat  to  be  hefieveH.  'it,   what  was 

,  red  for  thole  bom  again  in  (Thrift. " 

Re  produces!  this  observation  oT  another  fearned  writer 

i{  You  may  not 'lu.dsfeivedly  obferve,  that  only  l\  •    are 

capable  or  Daptifm." 

Liter;!  £xpl.  of "  •"..  _■  £      p.  fo#. 


• 


"  I  think  i         .._.,.  c.   ' 

id,    s  Cor.  i.  1 6.  iii'  .  rora- 

'     •    -;   !   were  baptized  by  nil  .,  when 

k  is             &h            '  ■        heie  were   anv  i   in  ihc 


Bifliop  TAYLOR. 

"  From  the  action  of  ChrifVs  blefTmg  infants,  to  infer  they 
are  to  be  baptized,  proves  nothing  fo  much  as  that  there  is  a 
nuant  of  better  arguments  ;  for  the  conclusion  would  with  more 
probability  be  derived  thus  :  Chrift  blefled  infants,  and  fo 
difmifTed,  but  baptized  them  not ;  therefore  infants  are  not 
to  be  baptized." 

Chambers*  Cyclopcedia,  on  Baptlfm. 

"  It  appears,  that  in  the  primitive  times,  none  were  bap- 
tized but  adults." 

GROTIUS. 

u  Infant  Baptifm  feems  to  me  to  have  been  praclifed  of 
old  far  more  frequently  in  Africa  than  in  Afia,  or  any  other 
parts  of  the  world,  and  with  a  greater  opinion  of  its  neceflity. 
For  in  the  councils  we  find  no  mention  of  this  cuflom  before 
the  council  of  Carthage." 

Annot.  in  Matt.  xix.  14. 

CURCELL^EUS. 

"  Paedobaptifm,  in  the  two  fir  ft  centuries  after  Chrift,  was 
unknown,  but  in  the  third  and  fourth  was  approved  of  by  a 
fewr,  began  to  prevail  in  the  fifth  and  iubfequent  ages  :  and 
therefore  this  rite  is  obferved  by  us,  not  as  an  apoftolic  tra- 
dition, but  as  a  cuftom  of  long  continuance." 

Relig.  Chrift.  Inft.  Lib.  i.  C.  12. 


C    41    ] 


SUICERUS. 

"  In  the  two  firft  ages  no  one  received  baptifm,  unlefs  he, 
who  being  previoufly  inftructed  in  the  faith,  and  tinctured 
with  the  doctrine  of  Chriit,  could  teftify  that  he  believed, 

&c." 

Thefaur.  Eccl.  fub  voce  2w«^?. 

BRANDT. 

"  That  good  and  very  antient  cuftom  of  baptizing  infants, 
is  advanced  with  too  much  violence  by  fome,  and  oppofed 
with  no  lcfs  by  others.  This  ceremony,  as  fome  think, 
prevailed  firft  in  Africa  and  Greece,  but  in  fuch  a  manner  that 
fome  doctors  of  the  church  openly  declared  that  they  could 
not  confent  to  it. 

Annot.  on  B.  II.  p.  8. 

Bifhop  BARLOW. 

"  The  truth  is,  infant  baptifm  did  (how  or  by  whom  I 
know  not)  come  in,  in  the  fecond  century  ;  and  in  the  third 
and  fourth  began  to  be  practifed,  though  not  generally,  and 
defended  as  lawful  by  that  text  grofsly  mifunderilood,  John 
iii.  5." 

Grantham's  friendly  epift.  p.  11. 

WHISTON, 

After  telling  us  that  he  had  difcovered,  that  the  only  in- 
fants or  little  children  intended  by  the  early  fathers,  when 
they  fpeak  of  them  as  baptized,  were  thofe  that  were  capable 
of  catechctic  instruction,  adds,  "  This  ir.oft  important  dis- 
covery I  foon  communicated  to  the  woild  in  this  paper  (i.  e. 
Primitive  infant  baptifm  revived)  which  both  Bifhop  Hcatlly 
and  Dr.  Clark  greatly  approved,  but  (till  went  en  in  the  ordi- 
nary praflice,  notwithstanding.  I  fent  this  paper  alfo  by  an 
intimate  friend,  Mr.  Haines,  to  Sir  Ifaac  Newton,  and  de- 
fircd  to  know  his  opinion.      The  anfwer  returned  was  this, 


[     42     ] 

that  they  both  had  difcovered  the  fame  thing  before  ;  nay, 
1  afterwards  found  that  Sir  Ifaac  Newton  was  fo  hearty  for 
the  Baptifts,  as  welt  as  for  the  Eufebians  or  Arians,  that  he 
iometirnes  fufpecled  thefe  two  were  the  two  witheffes  in  the 
Re\  elation." 

Vide  Whifton's  life,  p.  177,  178. 

Dr.  WHITBY 

Owns,  that  Dr.  Gale's  very  learned  letters  prove  it  to  be 
doubtful  and  uncertain,  whether  infant  bapiifm  did  ccrilantly 
1  !  tain  tillfeveral  hundred  years  after  Chrift, 

Diifert.  ce  S.  Script,  interpretatione,  pref.   §  5. 

LUDOVICUS  VIVES. 

<:  None  were  baptized  of  old,  but  thofe  who  were  of  age, 
v.  ho  did  not  only  v.rderftand  what  the  myftery  of  the  water 
Fieaat,  but  defired  the  fame  ;  the  perfect  image  whereof  we 
hive  yet  in  our  infant  baptiim.  1  c.r  itisafked  cf  the  infant, 
v  it  thou  be  baptized  :  for  v.  horn  the  fureiies  anfwer,  '  I 
will." 

Comment,  in  Auguft.  Lib.  i.  Cap.  27. 

1    Bifhop  TAYLOR. 

Lib,  Proph.  p.  239.     "  Lie  apair.f  t' 
c    ChrirVs  doclrine,  to  baptifeinfaRtp;  f<  d  1   hat  Chnit. 

1  ;ver    gave    any    precept    to    I  hem,    r  or  ever   him- 

f.lf,  nor  h»  •  afll<  s,  that  appears,  did  baptize  any  of  than- ; 
all  that. eithei  1  ;  his  apoliks  laid  concerning  it,  requires 
Lch  previous    c  ns   to   fcaptifm,   oi   which  infants  are 

rot  capable,   and  thefe  are  faith  and  repentance." 

To  make  no  more  quotations  en  this  head,  many  learned 
Padcbaptifts  have  acknowledged,  that  there  is  nothing  exprefs^ 
tithei  as  to  bn  tpi  cv  precedent,  for  the  baptifm  of  infants,  in 
the  wl  k  New  Teftament,  They  will  farther  a cknowh 
that  the  fain-ares  ll  ould  be  our  drily  guick  in  mafters  of  ie- 
•iis  inltitution.  The  unprejudiced  reade.i  \  i]J  dra\y  the 
=nce. 


[     43     3 


Tejlimonies  in  favour  of  I  mm  erf  ion 


C.  M.  DU  VEIL,  D.  D.  p.  75. 

li  THE  facred  ceremony  of  baptifm  is  not,  to  be  performed 
by  fnrinkling — but  by  the  plunging  of  the  whole  body,  as 
fir  ft  the  proper  fignilication  of  the  Greek  word  (bnptizo)  de- 
clares."  P.  77,  78.      "  But  to  fubftitute  in  the  room  of 

immerfion,  either  fprinkling,  or  any  other  way  of  applying 
water  to  the  body,  to  fignify  the  fame  thing,  is  not  in  the 
power  of  the  difpenfers  of  God's  myfteries,  or  of  the church ,'* 
as  Thomas  Aquinas  excellently  well  obferves,  "  it  belongs  to 
the  fjgnifier  to  determine  what  fign  is  tc  be  ufed  for  the  fg- 
r:\ication."      "  The  church  has    no   more   power    than   was 

derived  to  it  from  the  apoftles." P.  86.      "  The  cuftonfs 

of  churches  ought  to  fubmit  to  the  words  of  Ghrift,  not  the 
v%  ords  of  Chriii  ivrefled  to  the  cuftcms  of  the  church." 

Dr.  WHITBY,  en  Rottij  vi.  4. 

"  This  immerfion  being  refigioufly  cbferved  by  all  Chrif- 
tians  for  thirteen  centuries,  and  approved  by  cur  church, 
(meaning  the  church  of  England)  and  the  change  of  it  into 
fprinkling,  even  without  any  allowance  from  the  author  of 
this  inftitutiofl." 

GE.OTIUS. 

"  That  this  rite  (baptifm)  was  wont  to  be  performed  by 
immerfion,  and  not  by  perfufion*,  apj  I  om  the  pro- 

priety of  the  word,  and  the  places  chofen  for  its  admin.  I  - 
tion,  John  iii.  2,  3.  Acts  viii.  33.  and  from  the  manj  allu- 
fons  of  the  apoftle,  which  cannfc:  be  referred  to  fprinkling, 
R  )  ;.  vi.  3,  4.  Col.  ii.  12." 

x  .  mot.  i-  J^att.  m.  C. 


C     44     ] 
MAASTRICHT,  S.S.T.  P. 

"  Immerjior.  onhf,   was  ufed  by  the  apoftles  and  primitive 
church." 

Theologia,  p.  918. 

CALVIN. 

"  Here  we  plainly  fee  what  manner  of  baptizing  there  was 
among  the  ancients,  for  the  whole  body  was  dipped  into  water." 

On  Aclsviii.  38. 

Bifhop  TAYLOR. 

"  The  cuflom  of  the  antient  church  was  not  fprinkling, 
but  immerfion,  &c." 

Duel:.  Dub.  lib.  3.  4. 

Dr.  WITSIUS. 

"  (1.)  It  is  certain  that  both  John  and  the  difciples  of 
Chrift,  ordinarily  ufed  dipping,  whole  example  was  followed 
by  the  antient  church.  (2.)  It  cannot  be  denied,  that  the 
native  fignification  of  the  words  b«;tt<.v  and  BavT.^.v  is 
to  plunge  or  dip.  Nor  are  we  to  conceal,  (3.)  that  there  is 
a  greater  copicufnefs  of  fgnification,  and  a  fuller  fimilitvde 
between  the  fgn  and  the  thing  fgnifled  in  immerfion.  (4.) 
Nay,  that  immerfion  may  be  performed  in  cold  countries, 
without  anv  great  danger  of  health  and  life,  appears  fiom  the 
example  of  the  Ruffians,  who  plunge  the  children  that  are  to 
be  baptized  three  times  all  over,  not  believing  that  baptifm 
can  be  duly  performed  by  any  other  way." 

CEconomy  of  the  Covenants,  vol.  3,  p.  1213,  1214. 

Bifhop  TILLOTSCN. 

"  Antiently  thofe  who  were  baptized  put  off  their  gar- 
ments, which  fignified  the  putting  eff  the  body  of  fin,  and 
were  immerfed  and  buried  in  water,  &c." 

Sermon  on  2  Tim.  ii.  19.  p.  82. 


[     45     3 


Bifhop  HOADLY. 

"  Bamifm,  or  the  ceremony  of  immajion  in  tuater,  repre- 
fems'to  Chriinans  their  death  unto  fin,  &c." 

Sermon  before  the  King,   Feb.  15,  1^29-30. 

MEDE. 

"  There  was  no  fuch  thing  as  fprinkling  or  rantizmos  ufed 
in  the  apoftles  time,  nor  many  ages  after  them." 

Diatribe  on  Tit.  iii.  5.  p.  63. 

Dr.  MANTON. 

"  The  antient  manner  of  baptizing  was  to  dip  the  parties 
baptized,  and  as  it  were  bury  them  under  the  v/ater  for  a 
while." 

On  Rom.  vi.  4.  p.  14. 

BEZA. 

"  Chrifl:  commanded  us  to  be  baptized ;  by  which  word  it 
is  certain  that  immerfion  is  figniiied.  B«7rTi£*<r6a;,  in  this  place, 
is  more  than  ^swumm  ;  becaufe  that  feems  to  refpedt  the  whole 
body,  this  only  the  hands.  Nor  does  b«tt,^,v  fignify  to  warn, 
except  by  confequence  :  for  it  properly  fignifies  to  immerfe 
for  the  fake  of  dyeing.  To  be  baptized  in  water,  Ggnifies 
no  other  than  to  be  immerfed  in  water  ;  which  is  the  external 
ceremony  of  baptifm.  Bsi-ti^,  differs  from  the  verb  Swat, 
which  fignifies  to  plunge  in  the  deep  and  to  drown  ;  as  ap- 
pears from  that  verfe  of  an  ancient  oracle,  A<r*o?  /3*tt/£i,  </Yv«/ 
<Ti  to/  ei/'  B-i/uLic  is**;  in  which  thefe  two  terms  are  difHnguifh- 
ed,  as  expreffing  different  ideas." 

Epiuola  ii.  ad.  Thorn.  Tilium. 

LUTHER. 

"  The  term  baptifm,  is  a  Greek  word  :  it  may  be  render- 
ed a  dipping,  when  we  dip  fomething  in  water,  that  it  may  be 


[     46     ] 

entirely  covered  with  water.  And  though  that  ciiftom  be 
quite  abolifhed  among  the  generality,  (for  neither  do  they 
entirely  dip  children,  but  only  fprinkle  them  with  a  little  wa- 
ter ;)  neverthelefs,  they  ought  to  be  wholly  immerfed,  and 
prefer,  tly  to  be  drawn  out  again.  For  the  etymology  of  the 
wordfeems  to  require  it.  The  Get  mans  call  baptifra  tauff", 
from  depth,  which  they  call  tiejf,  in  their  language  ;  as  if  it 
were  proper  thofe  mould  be  deeply  immerfed,  who  are  baptized. 
And  truly,  if  you  confider  what  baptifm  fignifies,  you  fliall 
fee  the  fame  thing  required  :  for  it  iigmries  that  the  eld  man 
and  our  nativity,  that  is  full  of  fins,  which  is  entirely  of  rlefh 
ar:d  blood,  may  be  overwhelmed  by  divine  grace.  The 
manner  of  baptifm,  therefore,  mould  correfpond  to  the  figni- 
fication  of  baptifm,  that  it  may  fhow  a  certain  and  plain  fign 
of  it."  In  Dr.  Du  Veil,  on  A<fus  viii.  38. 

MAGDEBURG  CENTURIATORS. 

"  The  wor,d  $«•?£./£«>  to  baptize,  which  fignifies  immerfion 
into  water,  proves  that  the  adminilhatcr  of  baptifm  immer- 
fed, or  warned,  the  perfens  baptized  in  water." 

Cent.  i.  L.  ii.  C.  vi.  p.  382. 

PGOLE's  CONTINUATCRS. 

"To  be  baptized,  is  to  be  dipped  in  water;  metaphori- 
cally, to  be  pliinged  in  afflictions.  I  am,  faith  Chrifr,  to.be 
baptized  with  blood,  overwhelmed  with  fufferings  and  afflic- 
tionsi-'  Annot.  on  Matt.  xx.  22.  Edit.  1688. 

Dr.  DODDRIDGE. 

li  I  have,  indeed, a  moil  dreadful  baptifm  to  be  bap- 

1  with,  and  know  that  I  mail  fhortly  be  bathed  as  it  were 
in  bleed,  and  piiirged  in  the  molt  overwhelming  diftreis." 

Paraph,  on  Luke  xii.  50. 

BOSSUET. 
U  To  baptize,  fignifies  to  plunge,   33  is  granted  by  all  the 
world,"         In  Mr.  Stennett*,  again  ft  Mr.  Ruflen,  p.  174. 


C     47     ] 


LE  CLERC. 

"At  that  time  camejohn  the  baptizer.  He  has  been  called  the 
baptizer,  rather  than  baptijl,  becairfe  the  latter  word  is  a  proper 
name  in  the  modern  languages  ;  whereas  in  this  place  it  is  an 
appellative,  to  fignify  a  man  that  plunged  in  water  thofe  who 
teitified  an  acknowledgment  of  his  divine  million,  and  were 
defirous  of  leading  a  new  life — He  JJoall  baptize  you  in  the  Holy 
Spirit.  As  I  plunge  you  in  water,  he  fhail  plunge  you,  fo 
to  fpeak,  in  the  Holy  Spirit." 

Remarques  fur  Nouv.  Teft.  a  Matt.  iii.  I. 

DANISH  CATECHISM. 

"  What  is  Chriftian  dipping  ?  Water,  in  conjunction  with 
the  word  and  command  of  Chrift.  What  is  that  command 
which  is  in  conjunction  with  water  ?  Go  teach  all  nations,  and 
fo  on,  Matt,  xxviii.  19.  Mark  xvi.  15,  16.  What  is  im- 
plied in  thefe  words?  A  command  to  the  dipper  and  the 
dipped,  with  a  promife  of  falvation  to  thofe  that  believe. 
How  is  this  Chriftian  dipping  to  be  admin iftered  ?  The  per- 
fon  mufr.  be  deep-dipped  in  water,  or  overwhelmed  with  it, 
in  the  name  of  God  the  Father,  and  fo  on." 

Booth's  P^dobaptifm  exam.  &c.  p.  47. 

The  late  Mr.  Wejley  allows,  that  the  primitive  Chriilians 
were  baptized  by  immerfion,  and  that  Rom.  vi.  4.  alludes  to 
that  ancient  manner  of  baptizing.  (See  his  Note  on  that 
pa/Tage, 

MONTHLY  REVIEWERS. 

"  Hitherto  the  Anti-paedobaptifts  feem  to  have  had  the  be/t 
of  the  argument,  on  the  mode  of  adminiftering  the  ordi- 
nance. The  moll  explicit  authorities  are  on  their  fide.  Their 
opponents  have  chiefly  availed  themfelves  of  inferences,  ana- 
logy,  and  doubeful  conftruclion." 

Monthly  Review,  for  l\'Lty  1 784,  p.  390. 


[     48     ] 

In  favour  of  this  fenfe  of  the  word,  numerous  teflimonies 
may  be  adduced  from  the  writings  of  the  Society  of  Friends. 
Among  whom  are,  Robert  Barclay,  John  Gratton,  William 
Dell,  Thomas  Ekuood,  Samuel  F other gtll,  jfofeph  Phipps, 
William  Perm,  George  Whitehead,  Elizabeth  Bathurjl,  Thomas 
Law/on,  and  Anthony  Purver. 

Befides  the  mod  approved  Lexicographers,  fuch  as — 
Schrevelius,  Trommius,  Scapula,  Hedericus,  Eeigh,  Aljledu'-f^ 
and  Wilfon. 


THE  END. 


BAPTISM 


DISCOVERED, 


PLAINLY  AND  FAITHFULLY  ACCORDING 


TO  THE 


WORD  OF  COD, 


AGREEABLE   TO  THE  GLORIOUS  PATTERN-  GIVEN 
JBY  OUR  BLESSED  SAFIOUR  JESUS  CHRIST, 


'o  the  EXAMPLES  of  Thoufaads  bjptizzu  after  they 

BELIE  I  ED, 


ttfiCORDED  IN  SACR£D  SCRIPTURE.. 


By  JOHN.NORCOTT, 

A  Servant  of  JESUS  CHRIST,  and  of  His  CHURCH* 


A  New  Edition* 


MOUNT-HOLLY  : 

PRINTED  EY  STEPHEN  C,  USTICK* 

1799. 


imitation,  I  fhall  begin  with  this  example,  and 
make  a  few  obfervations  concerning  his  being 
baptized.  And  by  the  way,  take  notice  how 
exacl  the  Holy  Scripture  is  in  recording  the 
tircumftances  of  his  Baptifm. 


CHAPTER   I. 

Of  the  Baptifm  of  Chr'ijl  in  the  River  Jordan. 

Concerning  the  Baptifm  of  chn/t, 

we  may  read  at  large  in  Mat.  hi.  1 3.  SsjV.  cc  Then 
cometh  Jefus  from  Galilee  to  Jordan  unto  John9 
to  be  baptized  of  him."  Every  word  maybe  read 
with  emphafis.  (Then J  when  he  was  about  to 
enter  upon  his  public  miniftry,  as  you  may  fee, 
Mat.  iv.  1  y.  from  that  time  Jefus  began  to  preach* 
(Cometh)  he  might  have  commanded  John  to 
have  attended  him,  but  in  token  of  his  fubjec- 
tion  to  the  ordinance  of  God,  he  cometh. 
(From  Galilee)  many  miles,  and  probably  on 
foot :  every  ftep  we  take  for  God  is  acceptable, 
and  one  day  (hall  have  a  glorious  reward. 
(To  Jordan)  a  river  where  thoufands  had 
been  baptized ;  and  was  a  fuitable  place  for 
John  to  dip  cur  Lord  in,  as^  will  be  fcen 
hereafter. 

I    fliall  here   take   notice  of  eight  things 
remarkable  in  the  Baptifm  of  Chriji:  as, 


Firji,  his  age.  It  is  faid,  Luke  iii.  21.  €i  Jejus 
being  baptized,"  &c.  ver.  23.  Ci  began  to  be 
about  thirty  years  of  age.'5  Here  you  may  fee 
that  Chriji  himfelf  was  baptized  when  grown  in 
years.  Chriftians  then  be  not  afhamed,  your 
Captain  is  gone  before  in  this  alfo,  he  was  thirty 
years  old  when  he  was  baptized ;  in  this  Chriji  is 
not  alhamed  to  call  you  brethren,  Heb.  ii.  1 1. 

Secondly,  Another  thing  to  be  obferved  in 
the  Baptifm  of  Chriji  is  the  adminiftrator  John, 
who  confeffeth  himfelf  not  worthy  to  unloofe 
the  latchet  of  his  fhoes,  Mark  i.  7.  Now  if 
Chriji  would  receive  Baptifm  from  fuch  an 
unworthy  inftrument,  never  flight  the  ordin- 
ance, becaufe  they  are  unworthy  tha  .}.in- 
ifler  it,  but  have  refpeft  to  Chriji  your  example. 

Thirdly,  Note  the  repulfe  given  to  our  Lord, 
<c  John  forbad  him,"   Mat.  iii.  14.    Di 
and  oppofition  in  dirties  muft  be  no  excufe  ;  we 
mud  take  no  denial  in  Mowing  Ged,  Jtrive  to 
enter  in  at  the  Jiraighi  gate. 

Fourthly,  Obferve  the  reafon  of  the  repulfe 
given  by  John,  Mat.  iii.  14.  "  I  have  Heed  lobe 
baptized  of  thee,  and  comeif.  thou  to  me  me 

will  not  be  baptized  except  it  can  be  proved  of 
neceflity  ;  their  carnal  way  of  arguing  is,  : 
I  not  go  to  heaven  though  I  be  not  baptized  ? 
is  it  of  neceflity  to  falvatipn  ?  But,  Cb         1,  is 
this  like  thy  Lord  and  Maft< 
perfect  in  h o i i ;  1  e is  i    w a s   n c  . 
baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghoft  ?    he 
lins  to  be  wafti'd  away,   and   yet  wc 

15   2 


L     Wherefore  fee  your  example,  he 
doth  it  not  of  need,  but  in  obedience  to  bis 
ijl, 

vTote  the  excellent  terms  in  which  he 
iks  of  this  ordinance  of  Baptifm. 
r.  He  calls  it  a  fulfilling  c  teoufnefs, 

Mat.  iii.  15.  It  is  righteous  and  juft  that  I 
ftidbld  fubffiit  to  the  ordinances  of  my  Father. 
2;  He  calls  it  a  comely  thing,  thus  it  becometh 
-ns:  O!  it  is  a  very  comely  thing  for  God's 
to  have  refpecl  to  all  his  command- 
ments. 3,  He  joins  us  with  himfelf,  in  the 
terms  he  nfes,  it  becometh  us,  q.  d.  thee,  and 
me,  and  all  my  followers,  John  xii.  26*  "  If  any 

:  v7e  me,  let  him  follow  me  ;  and  where  I 
sun,       pc  fliall  my  fervant  be."  4.  It  is  called  a 

g,  a  completing  of  right eoufnefs,  2  Cor. 
x.  4.  "  The  weapons  of  our  warfare  are  not 
carnal,5'  but  fpiritual,  v.  6.  "  bringing  into  cap- 
tivity every  thought  to.  the  obedience  of  Chrf/i, 
and,  vex  6.  having  in  a  readinefs  to  avenge  all 
difobedience,  when  yourobedierice  lhall  be  fu 
led."  Obedience  mud  be  Fulfilled-  mull  be  com- 
plete. 5.  He  adds  a  note  of  univerfality  (O7//J; 
Baptifm  is  included  in  all  rigbteoi  fnefs,  or  all 
obedience.  Chrift  has  fo  reckoned  it,  certainly 
then  thou  canfl  not  walk  in  the  commands  of 
God  if  this  be  omitted.  6.  Obferve  in  the 
Baptifm  of  Chrift  the  manner  of  adminiflration, 
Mat,  iii.  16.  <6  went  up  ftraightway  out  of  the 
water,"  (Straitway),  as  foon  as  once  baptized. 
(Up)  had  he  not  gone  down,  it  had  not  been 


5 

faid  he  went  up.  (Out  of)  if  he  went  out,  lie  then 
finely  was  in  the  water;  we  never  fay  one  goes 
out  of  a  houfe  who  was  not  in  it.  So  Chrift 
would  not  have  been  faid  to  come  out  of  the 
water,  if  he  had  not  been  in  it.  Had  a  little 
water  been  brought  to  him  in  a  bafon,  we  had 
not  read  of  his  going  up  out  of  the  water.  Or 
if  water  had  been  poured  upon  his  head,  there 
had  been  no  need  of  going  into  the  water. 
This  water  was  the  river  Jordan. 

7.  Obferve  in  the  Baptifm  of  Chrift,  the 
Father's  acceptance,  Mat.  iii.    16.  17.  "  The 
Heavens  were    opened.5'     Some    of  Chr 
followers  have  found  the  heavens  opened  unto 
them  in  a  glorious  and  fpiritual  manner. 

And  the  Spirit  defended;  the  Spirit  is  pro- 
mifed  to  believers  at  their  Baptifm,  A  els  ii. 
38.  "  Repent,  and  be  baptized  every  one  of 
you — and  you  fhall  receive  the  Holy  Ghoft." 

Obj.  But  fure  every  one  that  is  baptized 
does  not  receive  the  Holy  Ghoft  ? 

Anfw.  If  they  do  not,  the  defect  is  not  in 
the  ordinance,  but  in  the  repentance  and  faith 
of  the  baptized;  without  which  repentance 
and  faith  no  ordinance  is  effectual.  And  it  is 
added  in  the  text,  Lo!  a  voice  from  Heaven, 
faying,  This  is  my  beloved  Son:  Chrift  the 
Head  was  fealed  at  Baptifm,  and  God  often 
feals  the  fonfliip  of  his  members,  fin  h. 
am  well  plcafd)  q.  d.  as  in  all  other  acts,  fo 
in  this  act  of  obedience  to  my  glorious  will. 
And  fo  alfo  is  the  Lord  well  pleafed  with  the 

B3 


6 

afts  of  cur  obedience  when  from  the  heart  we 
obey  the  form  of  doctrine  delivered  to  us,  Rom. 
xvi.  27.  The  fame  teftimony  is  given  to  the 
BlefTed  Son  of  God  in  the  mount,  Luke  ix.  $$, 
*-  This  is  my  beloved  Son,  hear  him."  Hear  him 
(that  is.  obey  him)  in  his  commandments  and 
appointments  ;  hear  him  fpeaking  to  this  effect 
at  fais  Baptifm;  Oh  !  (faith  he)  thus  it  becometh 
us ;  you  that  have  my  Father  for  your 
Father,  and  my  God  for  your  God  ;  thus 
it  becometh  us  to  be  baptized,  and  to  fulfil 
all  righteoufnefs :  Oh,  he  is  a  beloved  Son, 
bear  him. 

8.  Note,  in  the  Baptifm  of  Chrift  the 
concurrence  of  the  Trinity;  the  Father  approves 
with  a  voice  from  heaven,  the  Son  is  baptized, 
the  Holy  Ghofl  defcends  like  a  dove  ;  and 
furely  it  is  one  reafon  why  Baptifm  is  admini- 
stered in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son  and  Holy 
CJhoft ;  that  he  who  is  baptized,  and  therein 
profeffeth  his  belief  of  the  Trinity,  may  be 
affured  of  his  intereft  in  the  Father,  Son  and 
Holy  Ghoft.  And  the  wondcrous  unity  of 
the  Trinity,  feen  at  Chrift  Baptifm,  is  com- 
memorated at  the  Baptifm  of  every  believer* 


CHAPTER    II. 
Of  the  Great  commiilion  for  Believer's  Baptifat. 


O  U  have  heard  fomething  concerning 
the  pattern  or  example  of  our  Lord  Jefus,  and 
now  we  (hall  confider  his  command  recorded 
in  the  xxxviiith  of  Mat.  verfe  19.  It  is  faid  of 
cur  Lord  Jefus,  Acts  i.  1 .  that  he  began  both 
to  do  and  teach.  It  is  good  for  teachers  to 
imitate  their  Lord  to  do,  as  well  as  teach  :  in 
his  life  our  Saviour  gave  example  to  his  Apoftles, 
and  it  is  faid  before  he  was  taken  up  into 
heaven,  he  gave  commandments  to  his  Apoftles, 
Afts  i.  2.  "  He  was  taken  up,  after  that  he 
through  the  Spirit  had  given  commandments 
unto  the  Apodles ;"  of  which  commandments 
this  of  believers'  Baptifm  is  certainly  one.  For 
which  we  have  both  his  example  and  command- 
ment. It  is  written,  Ifa.  Iv.  4.  That  God  gave 
him  to  be  a  commander  and  a  leader  to  his 
people.  Chrift  is  a  gift,  as  a  commander  and 
as  a  leader.  And  O  !  how  great  a  favour  is  it  to 
have  fuch  a  wife  commander,  whofe  command- 
ments are  not  grievous;  and  in  keeping  whofe 
commandments  there  is  great  reward,  Pfahn 
xix.   1 1 . 

Now  .in  this  command  of  Chrift,  we  fhall 
,  take  notice  of  eight  things. 

Firft9  The   circumflances    in  which   Chrifi 
was  when  he  gave  this  command.   And  it  was 


8 

when  he  was  1  ifen  from  the  dead.  God  raifed 
hira  from  the  dead,  and  fent  him  to  blefs  us, 
A  els  iii.  26".  A  rifen  J  ejus  has  bled  us  with 
this  command,  Go  teach  all  nations ,  baptizing 
them,  &g.  A  bleffed  ^/?/j  gives  blefTed  com- 
mands. And  they  are  blefTed  who  do  them, 
"  BlefTed  are  they  that  do  his  commandments, 
that  they  may  have  a  right  to  the  tree  of  life, 
and  may  enter  in  through  the  gates  into  the 
city,"  Rev.  xxii.  14. 

Secondly r,  CHRIST  in  an  extraordinary 
manner  appeared  to  his  difciples  after  his 
refurre<ftion,  and  gave  them  his  commandment. 
Now,  {liquid  an  angel  appear  and  command  men 
to  be  baptized,  who  would  deny  obedience  ? 
but  here  you  have  the  glorious  Son  of  God 
appearing  in  his  own  perfon,  and  faying,  Go 
teach  all  nations ,  &c. 

Thirdly,  Note  with  what  authority  he  comes, 
Mat.  xxviii.  18.  "  All  power  is  given  unto  me 
in  heaven  and  in  earth. "  All  power  to  command 
in  heaven  and  in  earth  is  given  to  me ;  all 
rif  to  difpofe  of  heaven  and  earth ;  and  all 
power  to  protect  my  fubje&s,  is  given  to  me. 
I  have  angels  and  men  at  my  command ;  I  am 
therefore  able  to  proteft,  to  jfupport  you,  both 
in  the  fire  and  in  the  water:  I  have  all  power, 
Go  ye  therefore  1  teach  and  baptize,  fear  no 
enemies,  but  boldly  teach  and  baptize. 

Fourthly,  Note,  the  peremptory  terms  of 
the  command  itfelf,  Mat.  xxviii.  19.  Go 
therefore,  teach  and  baptize,     Chrift  but  fpakc 


9 

the  word,  and  (aid  to  the  Iegioti  Is,  Go? 

{Mat.  viii.  3 2. J  and  they  ran  violently}  a-nJ, 
iliall  not  believers  be  a  willing  people  in  the  day 
of  his  power*?  The  centurion  did  but  fay  go,  to 
his  fervants,  and  they  went ;  come,  and  they 
came;  do  this,  and  they  did  it.  And  fhall 
Chriffi  fervants  be  lefs  obedient  to  him,  than 
the  centurion's  were  to  their  mailer?  it  is  Chrift 
"  who  faith  Go. 

Fifthly ',  It  is  to  be  noted,  what  is  precedent 
to  Baptifm  ;  Go  teach;  there  mud  be  teaching 
before  Baptifm.  "  God  is  a  Spirit,  and  feeks 
fuch  to  worfhip  him  as  worfhip  him  in  Spirit 
and  in  truth,  John  iv.  24.  Therefore  there 
muft  be  teaching  before  baptizing,  or  n 
will  not  therein  worfhip  God  in  Spirit  and 
in  truth.  Go  teach  and  baptize!  Many  fay 
that  the  word  teach,  as  it  is  in  the  Greek, 
fignifies  to  make  difciples ;  and  I  dare  not  fay 
againfl:  it :  for  I  find  it  agreeable  to  the  account 
of  our  Lord's  practice,  who  flrft  made  difciples 
of  men,  and  then  baptized  them,  John  iv.  1. 
"  Jejus  made  and  baptized  more  difciples  than 
John;"  here  was  flrft  a  making  difciples,  and  then 
baptizing  them.  But  many  baptize  thofe  who 
never  were  in  any  good  fenfe  made  difciples. 
But  our  Lord's  command  is,  teach  all  nations , 
'  baptizing  them.  Firft  teach,  and  then  baptize 
them,  muil  certainly  be  the  meaning  of  t 
words. 

Sixthly,  Note  the  extent  of  the  command, 
Teach  all  Nations,  baptizing  them.     Go  (z% 


10 


if  he  fhould  have  faid)  into  all  nations,  be  the 
climate  hot  or  cold,  be  the  people  Jews  or 
Gentiles,  it  matters  not,  when  you  have  taught 
them,  then  baptize  them.  The  middle  wall  of 
partition  between  jew  and  Gentile  is  now  broken 
down.  New  it  appears  God  is  no  refpe&er  of 
perfens:  none  rauft  now  think  to  fay  they  have 
Abrah  to  their  Bather,  &c.  But  go  publifh 
the  Gofpel  indifferently  to  all,  to  every  creature, 
Mark  xv\.  15,  16.  e;  He  that  believeth  and  is 
baptized,  (hall  be  faved;"  that  believes,  and 
then  is  baptized. 

Se  r ve,  the  facred  words  of  admi- 

niftration,  Mat.  xxviii.  19.  "  Baptizing  them  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghoft." 
Here,  in  earthly  things,  that  which  is  done  in 
the  king's  name,  carries  power;  but  here  is 
the  name  of  the  Almighty  God  ;  the  name 
of  the  myfterious  Trinity,  Father,  Sen,  and 
Holy  Ghoft ;  and  canft  thou  then  think  that 
Baptifm  has  nothing,  or  but  little  in  it,  that 
is  done  in  fo  great  a  name,  and  with  fo  facred 
authority  ?  "  Go  teach  all  nations,  baptizing 
them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son  and  Holy 
Ghoft/' 

Eigbthly,  Note  the  glorious  promife  annexed, 
And  lo  I  am  with  you  to  the  end  of  the  world. 
Is  the  prefence  of  the  blelTed  Jefus  valuable  ? 
then  feek  it  in  that  way  he  has  promifed  that 
it  (hall  be  found.  Aik  for  the  old  and  the 
good  way,  and  walk  therein,  and  you  mall 
find  reft  for  your  fouls :  there  is  do  reft  for 


II 

the  foul  fhort  of  Chrift;  but  in  his  prefence 
is  fulnefs  of  joy.  If  then  you  are  perfuaded 
to  feek  his  lovely  prefence  do  like  Zacchens, 
get  into  the  way  by  which  Chrift  will  come. 
Go  teach  and  baptize,  and  io  I  am  with  you 
to  the  end  of  the  world  ;  and  it  is  confirmed 
with  an  Amen.  So  be  lt>  be  it  confirmed  and 
ratified. 


CHAPTER    III. 

Examples  recorded  in  Scripture  of  many  thoufands 
Baptized  in  Rivers,  upon  Profeilion  of  Faith  and 
Repentance." 

Finl  Example, 

JVlAY  be  of  thofe  which  Chrift  is  faid  to 
have  baptized,  John  iv.  1,2.  It  is  plain  from 
the  text  ntfrji  made  them  difciples,  and  then 
baptized  them.  Made  difciples  \  they  are  not 
born,  but  made  difciples ;  made  fo  by  the 
preaching  of  the  word,  by  facred  inftruction, 
and  then  baptized. 

2.  You  have  another  example,  Acls  ii.  41. 
"  Then  they  that  gladly  received  his  word,  were 
baptized  :"  of  thefe  we  read,  verfe  $y,  (i  that 
they  were  pricked  in  their  heart ;"  they  were 
convinced  of  their  fins ;  the  weight  of  guilt  lay 
heavy  upon  them  ;  they  knew  net  what  to  do* 
In  this  perplexity  the  Apoftie  tells  them,  Thai 
they  Jhoidd  repent  and  be  baptized,  and  then  they 


12 

Jhould  receive  the  Holy  Ghqfl.  "  Then  they  that 
gladly  received  his  word  were  baptized  :  and 
the  fame  day  there  were  added  unto  them  about 
three  thoufand  fouls,"  verfe  41.  Mercy  is 
fjveet  to  a  wounded  fovd,  and  fach  a  foul  (tops 
at  no  duty;  to  fuch  a  foul  it  feems  not  hard  to 
be  plunged  in  water  at  drift's  command. 

3.  Ycu  find  another  example,  Acls  viii.  12. 
cc  But  when  they  believed  Philip,  preaching  the 
things  concerning  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  the 
name  of  Jefus,  they  were  baptized,  men  and 
women."  How  fairly  might  it  have  been  added, 
and  children,  if  any  children  had  been  baptized  ? 
but  it  is  faid  when  they  believed,  <ver.  5,  thefe 
people  were  they  of  Samaria;  fome  of  thofe 
perhaps  on  whom  the  difciples,  fometime 
before,  would  have  called  down  fire  from 
heaven.  Oh  !  if  never  fo  near  deftruction, 
believe,  and  be  baptized,  and  thou  mayeft 
hope  for  mercy. 

4.  See  another  example,  Acls  viii.  35.  Philip 
preached  unto  the  Eunuch  Jefus.  v.  36.  ;c  They 
came  unto  a  certain  water,  and  the  Eunuch 
faid,  fee,  here  is  water :  what  doth  hinder  me 
to  be  baptized  ?"  v.  37.  "  And  Philip  faid,  if 
thou  believed  with  all  thy  heart,  thou  mayeft  :** 
If  thou  believed  ;  this  is  the  IF  we  infill  en  ; 
if  thou  art  never  fo  mean,  or  haft  been  never 
fo  vile,  yet  if  thou  believed,  thou  mayeft  be 
baptized.  It  was  not  this  eunuch's  being  born 
of  godly  parents ;  it  was  not  his  reading,  or 
his  coming  to  Jeriifalcm  to  worfhip,   or  his 


good  will  that  gave  him  privilege  to  be  h?  \ 
but  his  faith  ;  if  thou  believed,  thou  maydft  ; 
and  ver.  38 ,  "  They  went  both  down  into  the 
v  atcr,  both  Philip  and  the  Eunuch ;  bap- 

tised him."  Oh!  behold,  the  high  treafurer  01 
the  queen  of  Ethiopia,  a  rich  man,  an  honourable: 
man,  a  religious  man,  a  man  perhaps  having 
many  attendants  at  his  chariot,  he  flops  all,  com- 
mands all  to  (land  dill,  till  he  vieids  obedience 
to  his  Lord  and  Mafler  in  Baptiim.    Ke-counts 
it  reafonable  to  go  down  into  the  water  for  him, 
who  came  down  from  heaven  for  his  fake.    He 
counts  it  no  difgrace  to  obey  Chrifr*    com- 
mandments, though  brought  by  his  poor  fervant 
Philip.  O!    the  condefcenfion  of  trulv  gracious? 
fouls :  nothing  is  hard  to  a  foul  that  love;;  no 
arguments  fo  powerful  as  thofe  drawn  from 
thence  :    therefore  faith  our  Lord,  If  ye  love 
me,  keep  my  commandments.    Ver.  39.  "  And  he 
went  on  his  way  rejoicing :"   Oh !  what  triumph 
in  Cbrjft's  way!    in    keeping  as  well    as  for 
keeping  Chriffs  commands  there  is,  as  well  as 
fliall  be,  great  reward.     Pie  went  on-his^way 
rejoicing.    The  righteous  ihali  hold  on  his  way, 
and  he  that  hath  clean  hands  fliall  grow  flronger 
and  ilronger.     How  many  fouls  have  ftuck  la 
their  way,  wept,  and  drooped  in  their  way, 
and  gone  en  heavily  before  they  have  been 
baptized,  but  have  gone  on  their  way  rejoicing 
afterwards  ?   This  <?reat  man  mkht  have  a  fad 

o  o 

heart,  though  a  rich  treafurer,     Ric  uld 

not  give  fpiritual  joy,  but  being  baptized  he 

c 


\4 

went  on  his  way  rejoicing.  The  jailor  being 
baptized,  rejoiced,  believing  in  God  with  all 
his  houfe. 

5.   The  next  example  (hall  be  the  baptizing 
of  the  great  Apoftle  Paul;  fee  an  account  of  it, 
<c  And  now  why  tarried:  thou  ?  arife,  and  be 
baptized,  and  wafh  away  the  fins,     lie  that 
appeared  to  thee  in  the  way,  when  thou  waft 
a  perfecutor,  and  ftopt  thee  from  going  to  hell 
when  thou  waft  running,  hath  fent  me,  Acts 
xxii.    16."     To    this    effect.  Ananias    fpeaks, 
Acts  ix.    17.  "  And  why  tarrieft  thou?    arife 
and  be  baptized."     Acts  xxii.  16.      Thou  haft 
been  a  Perfecutor,  and   now  I  muft  fhew  thee 
'that  thou  muft  be  a  preacher,  and  a  fufferer. 
Arife  and  be  baptized,  why  tarrieft  thou  ?  g.  cL 
haften,  accept  the  terms  and  tender  of  mercy; 
O  bid  it  welcome,  put  it  not  ofT  a  day,  why 
doft  thou  tarry?  doift  thou  think  thyfelf  un- 
worthy,  and  therefore  tarrieft ;  let  not  that 
hinder ;  I  tell  thee  from  the  Lord,  thou  art 
a  chofen  veffel,  Acts  ix.  15.     Therefore  arife, 
why  tarrieft  thou  ?  be  baptized.     The  Lord  is 
willing  to  forgive  all  thy  former  fins,  and  to 
accept  thee  on  Gofpel-terms,  and   now  why 
tarrieft  thou  ?  arife,  and  be  baptized,  and  wafh 
away  thy  fins. 

6.  A  fixth  example  of  believers  baptized, 
is  the  jailor,  Acts  xvi.  31,  32.  He  went  to 
bed  in  the  guilt  of  his  fins,  and  might  have 
awaked  in  hell ;  but  preventing  mercy  met 
aim  when  his  fword  was  drawn  ;  and  God  by 


*5 

his  minifter  cries,  Do  thyfelf  no  harm,  q.  d. 
there  is  hope  for  thee:  ana  he  trembling  cries, 
What  muft  I  do  ?  That  foul  that  trembles 
before  the  Almighty  God,  will  not  only  cry, 
what  ihall  1  have  ?  but,  what  (hall  I  do?  Saith 
Paul  in  anfvver  to  this  enquiry,  Believe ;  believe 
on  the  Lord  Jefus ;  and  to  demonftrate  his 
willingnefs  to  yield  obedience  to  the  Lord  Jefus, 
and  to  accept  of  him  on  Goipel-terms,  he  is 
baptized  the  fame  hour  of  the  night,  ver.  ?$• 
and  all  his  houfhold  believed,  and  were  baptized, 
ver.  34. 

7.  Another  remarkable  example  is  Lydta, 
Acts  xvi.  14.  a  godly  woman,  a  praying 
woman;  God  opened  her  heart  to  attend  to 
his  word  preached  by  Paul,  and  being  at  the 
river,  fhe  was  baptized.  When  the  heart  is 
fliut,  how  backward  are  fouls  to  obey  Chrift? 
but  when  once  he  draws,  he  makes  the  fou! 
run  after  him,  Cant.  i.  4.  The  Lord  opened 
Lydia's  heart,  and  me  was  baptized. 

8.  You  read  the  eighth  example,  Acts  xviii. 
8.  Criffus  the  chief  ruler  of  the  fynagogue 
believed  on  the  Lord,  with  all  his  houfe;  and 
at  that  time  many  of  the  Corinthians  hearing, 
believed,  and  were  baptized.  Crifpus  believed, 
and  his  houfe  believed.  They  all  believed5  and 
and  then  they  were  baptized.  Thus  you  have 
pattern  and  precept ;  if  command  or  example 
be  of  force,  you  have  both. 


c  2 


i6 

CHAPTER    IV. 

Baptifm  is  Dipping,  or  Covering  under  Water. 

I.  1HE  Greek  word,  BAnTizn,  figni- 

fies,  to  plunge^  to  overwhelm,  &c.  fo  Chrift  was 
plunged  in  water,  Mat.  iii.  16.  and  thus  he  was 
overwhelmed  in  his  fufFerings,  Luke  xii.  50. 

2.  The  Dutch  tranflaiibn  renders,  Mat.  iii. 
i,  "  In  thofe  days  came  John  the  dipper," 
Joannes  de  doper ;  and  John  iii.  23.  "  John  was 
dipping  in  JEnon  near  Salim,  becaufe  there  was 

Hi  water  $    and  they  came  unto  him  and 
were  dipped,"  ende  vierden  gedoopt. 

3.  They  baptized  in  rivers,  Mat.  iii.  6\ 
<c  They  came  to  John,  and  were  baptized  of 
him  in  "Jordan,  confeffing  their  fins."  And 
we  read,  John  iii.  23.  "  John  was  baptizing  in 
JEnon  near  Salim,  becaufe  there  was  much 
water."  What  needed  it  have  been  done  in  a 
river,  and  where  there  was  much  water  ? 
would  not  a  little  in  a  bafon  ferve  to  fprinkle 
the  face  ? 

4.  Baptifm  reprefents  the  burial  of  Chrift, 
Rom.  vi.  3.  "  Therefore  we  are  buried  with 
him  in  Baptifm."  Col.  ii.  12.  "  Buried  with 
him  in  Baptifm."  A  man  is  not  faid,  to  be 
buried,  when  a  little  earth  is  fprinkled  on  his 
face ;  but  when  he  is  laid  down  in  the  grave, 
and  covered  with  earth ;  and  thus  you  are 
buried  in  Baptifm  when  covered  with  water. 


*7 

5.  Cbrift's  fufferings  are  called  a  Baptifm. 
Luke  xii.  50.  Ci  I  have  a  Baptifm  to  be  baptized 
withyand  1  am  ifraitened  till  it  be  accompllihed." 

■When  Chrift  fufFered,  he  was  plunged  into 
pains.  Did  he  only  fufFer  in  one  part,  in  his 
head  or  forehead  ?  no,  no,  there  was  no  part 
free :  his  pains  were  felt  from  head  to  foot : 
his  head  was  crowned  with  piercing  thorns  ; 
his  hands  and  feet  nailed  to  the  crofs;  his  body 
fo  (Iretched  on  the  crofs,  that  one  might  have 
told  all  his  bones,  Pfalm.  xxii.  17.  There  was 
not  any  part  free,  when  our  Lord  fufFered  for 
iinners,  fortheyhad  finned,  foul,  body,  and  fpirit. 
This  he  calls  his  Baptifm.  Thus  the  baptized 
are  plunged  under  water,  which  ferves  to  (hew 
how  Chrift  was  plunged  in  forrow  for  our 
fakes. 

6.  Baptifm  is  a  putting  on  Chrift,  Rom.  xiih 
14.  and  Gal.  iii.  27.  "  For  as  many  of  you 
as  have  been  baptized  into  Chrift •,  have  put 
on  Chrift"  As  a  fervant  wears  his  Lord's 
livery,  a  garment  which  demonftrates  him  to 
be  a  fervant  to  fuch  a  Lord ;  fo  in  Baptifm, 
we  put  on  our  Lord's  livery,  which  may  be 
fignifled  by  our  being  covered  from  head  to 
foot  with  water;  fo  we  put  on  Chrift  at 
Baptifm. 

7.  When  Chrift  was  baptized ',  he  came  up  out 
of  the  water ,  Mat.  iii.  16.  Had  it  been  only 
a  little  water  fprinkled  on  his  face,  he  had  not 
been  faid  to  have  been  in  the  water.     , 

in  Acts  viji.  38,  it  is  written,  "  They  went  both 


c 


18 

down  into  the  water,  (and  being  there  in  the 
ivater)  he  baptized  him,  and  when  he  was 
baptized,  he  came  up  out  of  the  water," 
fpeaking  of  Philip  and  the  eunuch.  Thus  you 
fee  the  place  where  the  firflChriftians  ordinarily 
were  baptized,  was  a  river.  Their  action  was 
going  down  into  the  water ;  then  being  in  the 
water,  they  were  baptized ;  this  was  done 
where  there  was  much  water.  The  end  of  fo 
doing  was  to  (hew  forth  Chriffs  burial.  Now 
if  there  be  not  a  burying  under  water,  this 
end  is  loft ;  Chrift's  burial  is  not  (hewn,  nor  can 
it  be  faid,  we  are  buried  with  him  in  Baptifm. 

Obj.  But  why  may  not  fprinkling  with  water 
ferve,  as  well  as  covering  under  water  ?  is  there 
any  more  virtue  in  a  great  deal  of  water  to 
walli  away  fin  than  a  little  ? 

Anf.  i.  Neither  a  great  deal  nor  a  little 
does  wafli  away  fin,  but  fignifies  the  wafliing 
away  of  fin.  But  fprinkling  may  not  ferve  as 
well  as  dipping. 

i.  Becaufe  God  is  a  jealous  God,  and 
requires  the  ways  of  his  worfhip  punctually  to 
be  kept,  as  delivered.  It  is  likely  Nadab 
and  Abihu  thought,  if  they  put  fire  in  the 
cenfer,  it  might  ferve,  though  it  were  not 
lire  from  the  altar  :  but  God  calls  it  ftrange 
fire,  and  therefore  burns  them  with  ftrange 
fire,  Lev.  x.  2,  3.  And  Mofes  adds,  ver.  3. 
"  This  is  it  that  God  hath  faid,  I  will  be 
fan&ified  in  them  that  draw  nigh  unto  me,  and 
before  all  the  people  will  I  be  glorified,"  God 


M 


l9 

bids  Mofes  fpeak  to  the  rock,  and  Mofes  fmote  the 
rock,  and  therefore  muft  die  fhort  of  Canaan, 
Numb.  xx.  ii,  12. 

2.  Sprinkling  will  not  ferve,  becaufe  that 
way  this  end  of  the  ordinance  is  loft,  viz,  to 
fhew  forth  the  death,  burial,  and  refurreclion 
of  Chrift.  Rom.  vi.  4.  "  You  are  buried  with 
him  by  Baptifm,   that  like  as  he  was  raifed," 

3.  Sprinkling  will  not  ferve,  becaufe  it  is 
not  what  God  has  appointed.  Naaman,  the 
leper,  thought  the  waters  of  Damafcus  might 
have  the  fame,  or  more  virtue  than  the  waters 
of  Ifrael,  2  Kings  v.  12.  "  May  I  not  wafli 
in  them  and  be  clean  ?"  but  God  had  appointed 
him  to  dip  in  Jordan;  not  that  there  was  more 
virtue  in  that  water,  but  God  had  appointed 
that ;  and  he  dipped,  and  was  clean.  Dipping 
is  God's  appointment,  and  therefore  fprinkling 
will  not  ferve. 

4.  Sprinkling  will  not  ferve,  becaufe  it  is 
not  to  the  pattern  Chrifi  has  given.  Chrift 
went  down  into  the  water;  and  Philip  and  the 
Eunuch  went  down  into  the  water,  A&s  viii. 
38.  "  See  that  thou  doit  all  things  according 
to  the  pattern,"  is  God's  command  to  Mofes, 
Exod.  xxv.  40. 

5.  Sprinkling  will  not  ferve,  becaufe  it  is 
high  prefumption  to  change  God's  ordinances. 
Is  not  God  wife  enough  to  appoint  his  own 
worfhip,  how  it  fhall  be  performed  ?  Ifaiah 
xxiv.  5.  "  The  earth  is  defiled,  becaufe  they 
have  changed  my  ordinance." 


io 


6.  Sprinkling  will  not  ferve,  becaufe  fprink- 
ling  is  not  Baptiftn.  It  is  not  the  thing 
intended  by  God  when  he  commands  to  be 
baptized,  that  is,  plunged,  and  not  fprinkled  ; 
and  therefore  fprinkling  will  not  ferve.  Bap- 
tifm,  or  dipping,  is  God's  counfel,  Lukevn.  29. 


CHAPTER    V. 

Proving   Water-Baptifm,    to    continue    till    the    Second 
Coming  of  jfejus  Chrijl. 

1  HA  T  it  may  appear  that  Water- 
Baptifm  is  to  be  continued,  and  is  now  to  be 
pra&ifed  by  believers,  take  thefe  fix  confidera- 
tions. 

1.  Confider,  it  was  once  commanded,  and 
that  command  never  repealed  :  and  no  power 
can  repeal  a  commandment  of  Chrift,  but  the 
fame  power  by  which  it  was  given  forth.  We 
are  therefore  earneftly  to  "  contend  for  the 
faith  once  delivered  to  the  Saints/'  Jude  v.  3. 

2.  Confider,  that  Water-Baptifm  was  prac- 
tifed  before  and  fmce  the  coming  of  Chrift,  as 
appears  from  Ac*ts  viii.  38.  and  A&s  x.  47. 
"  Can  any  man  forbid  water  that  thefe  fliould 
not  be  baptized,  who  have  received  the  Holy 
Ghoft  as  well  as  we  ?  Then  commanded  he 
them  to  be  baptized."  Here  is  mention 
made  of  water,  and  a  command  to  be  baptised 


therein,,  given  by  an  Apoftle  extraordinarily 
fent  by  Chrift,;  A&s  xvi.  13,  14.  LyJia  was, 
by  a  river  fide,  in  which  river  it  appears  ihc 
was  baptized. 

3.*  The  command  for  Water-Baptifm  was 
given  after  Chrift's  refurredlion,  Mat.  xxvvi. 
19.  "  Go  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  i\  " 
Had  Water-Baptifm  ceafed  at  Chrift's  dea 
it  had  not  been  commanded  after  his  refur- 
reclion. 

4.  It  is  to  be  confidered  that  the  end  of  this 
ordinance  remains,  as  the  end  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  is  to  mew  forth  Chrift's  death  till  he 
come :  and  that  ordinance  is  to  be  kept  in 
remembrance  of  Chrift,  even  until  his  fecond 
coming :  fo  Baptifm  is  to  fhew  the  death, 
burial,  and  refurreclion  of  Chrift,  Rom.  vi. 
3,  4,  5.  And  therefore  the  end  remaining, 
the  ordinance   fliould  remain  till   his  fecond 


cominor. 

D 


5.  Confider,  it  hath  been  continued,  by  all 
forts  of  Chriftians,  through  all  ages,  fince 
flrft  our  Lord  left  that  commandment  with 
his  faints. 

6.  The  fame  argument  that  throws  down 
Water-Baptifm,  if  granted,  will  it  not  throw 
down  all  ordinances  ?  for  if  you  grant  that 
when  the  Spirit  is  come,  Baptifm  ceafeth;  may 
you  not  as  well  allow  that  when  the  Spirit  is 
come  prayer  ceafeth,  preaching  ceafeth  ?  &c. 
But  this  is  the  reafoning  of  man's  corrupted 
heart.     Chrift  faith,  "  Teach  them  to  obfervc 


22 


all  things  which  I  have  commanded  you.  And 
3o  I  am  with  you  to  the  end  of  the  world," 

Mat.  xxviii.  19,  20. 


CHAPTER    VI. 


That  no  Meafures  of  Grace,  or  of  the  Spirit,  mould  keep 
any  from  Water-Baptifm. 


X  HAT  no  meafures  of  grace,  or  of  the 
Spirit,  fhould  keep  back  any  from  Waier- 
Baptifm,  will  appear  plainly  if  you  will  conlider, 

1.  That  Baptifm  is  from  heaven,  Mat.  xxi. 
25.  Now  what  degree  of  fpirituality  fhould 
keep  back  from  fo  heavenly  an  ordinance  ? 

2.  Confider  the  Lord  Jefus  had  all  grace, 
and  the  Spirit  without  meafure ;  as  appears 
from  John  iii.  34.  And  yet  he  was  baptized 
in  the  river  Jordan^  Mat.  iii.  13,  &c.  Is  not 
this  a  pattern  for  believers  to  follow  ? 

3.  Where  has  God  limited  Baptifm  to 
perfons  of  little  grace,  or  little  of  the  Spirit  ? 
nay,  on  the  contrary,  hath  not  God  promifed 
his  fpirit  that  you  may  keep  his  ordinances,  and 
do  them?  Ezek.  xi.  19,  20. 

4.  Conlider,  the  Apoftle  makes  receiving 
the  Spirit,  an  argument  to  encourage  Baptifm, 
Acts  x.  47.  "  Can  any  man  forbid  water, 
that  thefe  fhould  not  be  baptized,  who  have 


23 

received  the  Holy  Ghoft  as  well  as  we  ?"  If 
you  obferve  you  will  find  thefe  were  fo 
baptized  with  the  Spirit,  that  they  fpake  with 
tongues,  and  prophefied.  Strange  effects!  to 
fpeak  with  tongues,  and  prophefy!  Such  a 
meafure  of  the  Spirit  is  not  given  in  our  days, 
yet  they,  thus  bleifed  with  the  Spirit,  were 
commanded  to  be  baptized,  ver.  48. 


CHAPTER  VII. 
Believers'  Baptifm  a  Great  Ordinance. 

1  H  E  greatnefs  of  this  ordinance  of 
believers'  Baptifm  will  appear  if  you  will  take 
to  mind  thefe  eight  confederations. 

1.  That  Baptifm  is  an  ordinance  which  hath 
a  mod:  glorious  pattern  and  inftitutor.  j  The 
Captain  of  our  falvation  himfelf  did  pra&ife 
the  fame,  Mat.  iii.  13.  "  Then  cometh  Jefus 
to  be  baptized."  "  If  any  man  ferve  me,  faith 
Chrift,  let  him  follow  me,  and  where  I  am, 
there  fhall  my  fervant  be,"  John  xii.  26. 
Chriit  is  the  great  example  to  believers  in  this 
ordinance. 

2.  Confider  in  how  great  a  name  this 
ordinance  is  admiuiitered.  "  In  the  name  of 
the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Choi!,"  Mat. 
xxviii.  20.  This  is  a  great  name,  a  name  not 
to  be  lightly  thought  of. 


3.  Confider  what  approbation  the  Father 
gave  to  this  ordinance  at  the  Baptifm  of  Chrift, 
Mat.  iii.  17.  "  The  heavens  were  opened, 
and  a  voice  heard,  faying,  This  is  my  beloved 
Son,  in  whom  I  am  well  pleafed."  There  was 
an  apparent  concurrence  of  the  Trinity  at 
ChrifVs  Baptifm. 

4.  Gonfider  the  excellent  terms  in  which 
our  Saviour  fpeaks  of  Baptifm.  He  calls  it 
a  comely  thing,  a  fulfilling  of  all  righteoufnefs, 
C£  Thus  it  becometh  us  to  fulfil  all  righteouf- 
nefs, V  Mat.  iii.  15. 

5.  Confider  the  commhTion  given  to  the 
minifter,  Mat.  xxviii.  19.  "  Go  teach  all 
nations,"  &c.  This  is  one  of  the  lafl  commands 
of  our  Saviour  after  his  refurreclion,  and  a 
little  before  his  afcenfion. 

6.  Confider  the  great  promifes  belonging  to 
this  ordinance.  As  of  the  glorious  prefence  of 
Chrift,  Mat.  xxvii/  20.  And  you  have  alfo 
the  promife  of  the  Holy  Ghoft,  Acts  ii.  38. 
'.'  Repent  and  be  baptized,  and  ye  ftiall  receive 
the  Holy  Gho{l.,,  And  of  the  wafhing  away 
of  fins,  A  els  xxii.  16.  And  of  falvation,  Mark, 
xvi.  16.  "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized, 
iliall  be  faved."  The  promife  of  Chrift's 
prefence,  of  the  Holy  Ghoft,  pardon  of  fin, 
and  of  falvation,  are  certainly  great  promifes. 

7.  It  is  called  the  counfel  of  God,  Luke  vii. 
-  30.  "  They  rejected  the  counfel  of  God  again!! 

themfelves,  not  being  baptized."  Is  the  counfel 
p'f  God  a  fmall  Thing  ? 


25 

8.  Confider  that  Chrift  has  repeated  his 
command  for  Baptifm,  fmce  he  hath  been  gone 
to  heaven,  Acts  viii.  29.  The  fpirit  bid  Philip 
join  himfelf  to  the  Chariot,  that  he  might 
preach  to,  and  fo  baptize  the  eunuch.  Here 
is  one  call  from  heaven.  Another  command 
from  heaven  you  have  when  the  Lord  ye/us  fent 
Ananias  to  Paul,  Acts  xxii.  16.  "  And  now 
why  tarried  thou  ?  arife  and  be  baptized,  and 
wafh  away  thy  fins,"  faith  Ananias  when  fent 
by  command  from  heaven,  as  in  Acts  ix.  19. 
"  The  Lord  called  Ananias  in  a  vifion,  and 
fends  him  to  Saul."  And  again  you  find  in 
Acts  x.  4,  5.  Cornelius  hath  a  call  from 
heaven,  to  fend  for  Peter.  And  Peter  is  com- 
manded to  go  to  him  ver.  19,  20.  And  when 
Peter  came,  he  commanded  Cornelius,  and  the 
reft  to  be  baptized.  All  thefe  things  ferve  to 
ihew  Baptifm  to  be  a  great  Ordinance. 


CHAPTER    VIIL 

Anfwers  to  the    common    Objeftions  againfl    Believers 

Baptifm. 

OUCH  is  the  perverfenefs  of  men's  hearts 
that  they  will  make  objections  aoainft  the 
cleared  truth  in  the  blefTed  word  of  God. 
Which  of  the  truths  taught  by  God  in  his 
word  hath   not  been  objected  againfl  ?    Yea, 

D 


26 

Iiath  not  God  himfelf  been  objected  againft  ? 
But  we  may  fay  of  Baptifm  as  is  faid  in  another 
cafe,  Thefe  1  kings  were  not  done  in  a  corner.  I 
fhall  only  add  this  Scripture  caution,  Take  heed 
that  you  clofe  not  your  eyes,  lejb  you  jhouldfee  and 
erted,  and  Chrljl  Jhould  heal  you.  Take 
heed  of  clofmg  the  eyes, or  hardening  the  heart, 
be  willing  in  the  day  of  God's  power.  And 
If  now  in  confeience  thou  defireft  fatisfaclion, 
attend  to  the  anfwers  of  the  following  objections. 

Obj.  i.  SomeobjecUo  Mat.  xxviii.  20.  where 
it  is  faid,  to  the  end  of  the  world,  that  the 
meaning  is,  to  the  end  of  that  age. 

Anf.  This  cannot  be  the  fenfe  of  the  text, 
firft,  becaufe  Chrifl  there  bids  his  Apoflles 
teach  men  to  obferve  all  things  that  he  commanded 
them,  Mat.  xxviii.  20.  teaching  them  to  obferve 
all  things  whatfoever  I  have  commanded  you. 
Now  do  you  think  that  all  things  the  Apoftles 
were  to  teach  them  to  obferve,  were  to  be 
obferved  only  to  the  end  of  that  age  ?  Chrift 
had  commanded  them  to  repent,  believe,  and 
be  holy,  to  be  baptized,  &c.  And  were  thefe 
commands  to  be  taught  only  to  the  end  of 
that  age  ? 

Secondly,  Chrift  there  promifes  his  prefence 
to  the  end  of  the  world.  "  I  am  with  you  to 
the  end  of  the  world,"  Mat.  xxviii.  20.  Now 
has  Chrift  here  promifed  his  prefence  only  to 
the  end  of  that  age  ?  this  would  be  dreadful 
doctrine.  No,  Chrift's  promife  is,  "  I  will 
never  leave  thte  nor  forfake  thee,"  John  i.  5. 


27 

The  promife  of  his  preience  is  through  all  ages ; 
to  the  end  of  the  kobrid.  And  fo  long  his 
commands  are  to  be  obfervcd. 

Obj.  2.  But  Water-Baptifm  was  John's 
Baptifm. 

'  nf.  Was  the  Baptifm  of 'John  from  heaven, 
or  of  men  ?  John's,  Bapiifm  was  from  heaven, 
Mat.  xxi.  25.  John  was  but  to  prepare  the 
way  for  Chritl,  Luke  i.  16.  tc  Thou  mult  go 
before  the  face  of  the  Lord  to  prepare  his 
way."  John's  Bapf.ifm  did  but  prepare  the 
way  for  ChriiVs.  But  further,  hath  not 
Chrift  commanded,  and  the  Church  praaifed 
Baptifm  fince  John's  death  ;  yea,  &n< 
reiurreclion  ?  Is  it  not  Chri$!%  command,  Go 
teach. all  nations,  baptizi  .7,  and  wilt  thou 

fay  this  is  John's  Baptifm  ? 

Obj,  3.  But  in  Chrift  circumcifion,  or 
uncircumcifion,  availeth  nothing,  but  a  new 
creature. 

Anf.  Circumciilon  was  fomethin^  when  the 
Lord  would  have  killed  Mofes  for  omitting  it, 
Exod.  iv.  19.  And  when  the.  Lord  laid, 
"  Thai  every  male  that  was  not  circumcifed, 
fliould  be  cut  off  from  the  people,"  as  in  Gen. 
xvii.  14.  Now  indeed  it  is  nothing,  becaufe 
aboli flied.  But  wiit  thou  fay  Baptifm,  the 
council  of  God,  is  nothing?  or  that  the  command 
of  the  Lord  Jefus  is  nothing  ? 

Obj .  4.  I  am  baptized  with  the  Spirit, 
which  is  the  (ubllance,  Watcf-Baptifm  h  but 
the  ill  ado  w. 

d  2 


28 

Anfi  Thou  mayeft.  as  well  fay  of  all  other 
ordinances  they  are  but  fhadows,  and  whither 
wilt  thou  run  ?  Further,  the  queftion  is  not, 
whether  it  be  a  fhadow,  or  fubftance,  but  is 
it  the  command  of  Chrift  ?  If  a  command, 
difpute  not  Chri/l's  authority.  Again,  if 
"Waier-Baptifm  be  a  fhadow,  yet  it  is  fuch  as 
Ghrift  fubmitted  himfelf  to,  and  who  art  thou? 
Wilt  thou  be  wifer  than  Chrift?  And  alfo  they 
who  were  baptized  with  the  Spirit ',  who  /pake 
with  tongues,  and prophefied,  yet  were  baptized 
in  water,  A6ls  x.  47^.  Remember,  he  that  is 
faithful  in  the  lead,  is  faithful  in  much. 

Obj.  5.  Doth  not  Baptifm  come  in  the  room 
of  circumcifion. 

dnf.  No  furely,  for  there  is  not  any  word 
of  God  that  proves  fuch  a  thing:  and  thou 
mud  not  be  wife  above  what  is  written, 
1  Cor.  iv.  6.  Again  confider,  circumciiion 
concerned  only  the  males :  but  it  is  written, 
Acts  viii.  12.  "  When  they  believed,  they  were 
baptized,  men  and  women." 

Obj,  6.  But  are  not  very  learned  men  for 
Infant-Baptifm  ? 

Anf.  The  pharifees  and  lawyers,  the  learned 
men  of  the  times,  rejected  the  council  of  God 
againfi  themfelves,  not  being  baptized,  Luke 
vii.  20,  30.  Do  not  fay,  as  they  who  faid,J 
which  of  the  rulers  have  believed  in  him  ? 
note  what  our  Saviour  faith,  Mat.  xi.  25. 
"  Jefus  anfwered,  I  thank  thee,  O  Father, 
Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,  that  thou  haft  hid 


29 

thefe  things  from  the  wife  and  prudent,  and 
hail:  revealed  them  to  babes."  And  further, 
if  learning  were  to  be  pleaded  to  this  purpofe, 
might  not  the  papifts  plead  the  learning  of  their 
Cardinals  and  Jefuits  ? 

Obj.  7.  But  there  are  many  godly  paflors 
of  Churches  who  hold  lnfant-Baptifm. 

Anf.  You  are  not  to  follow  an  Apoflle 
further  than  he  followeth  Chrift,  1  Cor.  xi.  j. 
"  Follow  me  as  I  follow  Chrifl."  Again, 
bring  no  examples  of  good  men  againfl  an 
exprefs  word  of  God.  Elias  was  a  good  man, 
he  called  down  fire  from  heaven  to  deflroy 
men,  but  our  Lord  will  not  allow  his  difciples 
to  do  fo.  Jehqfhaphat  was  a  good  king,  but 
the  high  places  were  not  removed  by  him ;  in 
that,  his  example  was  not  good,  and  therefore 
not  to  be  followed:  follow  no  example  contrary 
to  God's  word. 

Obj.  8.  But  there  is  not  a  word  againfl 
baptizing  Infants. 

Anf.  Nadab  and  Abihu  were  burnt  with  fire 
becaufe  they  did  that  which  the  Lord  com- 
manded not,  Lev.  x.  2,  3.  Again,  we  have 
no  exprefs  word  in  Scripture,  which  faith, 
Thou  jhalt  not  baptize  bells,  as  you  may  read 
in  the  book  of  Martyrs,  they  did.  Where 
hive  you  an  exprefs  word  that  faith,  Thou 
Jhalt  not  ufe  fait,  or  cream,  or  fpittle,  in  Baptifm, 
as  the  Roman  Catholics  do  ?  but  you  mufl 
know  that  it  is  enough  againfl  Infants'  Baptiim, 
that  it  is  not  commanded. 

D3 


3° 

Obj.  9.  But  were  not  whole  families  bap- 
tiz. 

Anf.  But  it  is  faid  of  thofe  families  that  they 
believed,  Adls  xvi.  33.  "  Ke  was  baptized, 
and  all  his,"  and  v,  34.  he  "  rejoiced,  believing 
in  God  with  all  his  houfe."  A£ts  xviii.  8. 
"  Ci  the  chief  ruler  believed    in  God 

with  all  his  houfe."  In  the  cafe  of  Lydia 
there  is  no  mention  of  hufband  or  children, 
whether  fac  was  a  maid  or  widow,  is  left 
uncertain. 

Obj.  1  o.  Infants  were  once  Church  members, 
and  we  do  not  find  they  were  cut  off. 

Anf.  We  are  taught  that  the  natural  branches 
were  broken  off  for  their  unbelief :  and  that  if 
they  believe  they  fhall  be  grafted  in  again ; 
but  till  then,  till  they  fhall  believe,  they  remain 
broken  off.  Rom.  xi.  20,  21.  Again,  in  the 
Gofpel  it  is  faid,  "  The  ax  is  laid  to  the  root 
of  the  tree,  and  every  tree  that  brings  not  forth 
ftood  fruit,  is  hewn  down  and  call  into  the 
lire."  We  mull  not  now  fay,  we  have 
Abraham,  or  a  believer,  for  our  father,  accord- 
ing to  that  place,  Mat.  iii.  9,  10.  And  this 
is  the  feme  of  the  fure  word  of  God.  Thus 
vou  fee  the  Sadduces  who  came  to  John  with 
this  pretence,  that  they  had  Abraham  to  their 
:\\  were  rejected,  Mat.  iii.  7,  8.  Obferve 
fun  3,  were  members  of  the  national 

irch  of  the  Jews.     But  where  do  we  find 

ey  were  ever   members  of  particular 

..es    under    the    Gofpel    difpenfation, 


31 

When  Infants  were  Church  members,  fervants 
bought  with  money,  all  fubje&s  of  the  Jewifli 
government,  were  alfo  Church  members.  There 
was  then  a  middle  wall  of  partition  between  the 
Jews  and  other  nations :  all  within  this  wall 
were  reckoned  members  of  their  Church  ;  all 
without,  of  the  world,  and  of  the  kingdom  of 
darknefs  :  but  this  wall  of  partition  is  broken 
down.  God  is  no  refpec"ter  of  perfons,  but  in 
every  nation,  fuch  as  fear  him  and  work 
righteoufnefs,  are  accepted,  Ac~h  x.  38. 

Obj.  11.  But  is  the  privilege  of  believers' 
children  lefs  under  the  Gofpel  than  it  was  under 
the  law  ? 

Anf.  What  can  that  difcourfe  of  privilege 
mean  ?  Was  it  a  privilege  to  be  under  the 
difpenfation  of  the  law  ?  Is  it  not  a  greater  to 
be  under  the  Gofpel  ?  Or  doft  thou  mean  by 
privilege,  to  have  a  right  to  fpiritual  promifes  I 
If  fo,  the  Apoftle  tells  thee,  Rom.  ix.  8.  They 
which  are  children  of  the  Flefh,  are  not  the 
children  of  promife.  Or  doft  thou  by  privilege 
mean,  partaking  of  the  vifible  ordinance  of  cir- 
cumcifion  ?  And  is  this  fuch  a  privilege  which 
the  Apoftle,  A&s  xv.  10.  calls  a  yoke  ;  a  yoke, 
faith  he,  which  neither  we  nor  our  fathers  were 
able  to  bear  ?  And  is  this  the  privilege  thou 
contend  eft  for  ? 

Obj.  12.  But  the  (eed  was  in  covenant? 
God  made  a  covenant.with  Abraham  and  hisfeed. 

Anf.  Let  us  enquire  what  is  meant  by 
covenant  ?  Doft  thou,  by  covenant,  mean  the 


32 

covenant  that  was  made  on  mount  Sinai;  a 
covenant  of  works?  Or  dofl  thou  mean  a 
covenant  of  grace  ?  If  (o,  thou  makeft  the 
covenant  of  grace  changeable,  and  to  be 
broken.  Dofl  thou  fuppofe  that  IJhmael,  Saul, 
jferoboam  and  Ahaz,  and  the  reft  were  all  in 
the  covenant  of  grace  ?  Or  had  they  an  intereft 
in  it,  but  loft  that  intereft  ?  So  thou  wilt  make 
the  covenant  of  grace  a  changeable  covenant : 
in  lliort,  a  covenant  of  works.  God  made  a 
double  covenant  with  Abraham  Gen.  xvii.  7, 
8.  &c.  firft,  he  promifes  to  Abraham,  and  his 
{cedy  to  give  them  the  land  of  Canaan;  and 
this  belonged  to  all  his  feed  :  again,  he  makes 
the  promife  of  life  and  falvation  to  Abraham 
and  all  his  feed,  Gal.  iii.  16.  "  Now  to  Abra- 
ham and  his  feed  were  the  promifes  made.  He 
faith  not  unto  feeds,  as  of  many,  but  as  of  one, 
and  to  thy  feed,  which  is  Chrift."  And  it  is  faid 
Rom.  ix.  8.  "  The  children  of  promife  are 
counted  for  feed."  Take  this  text  right  and 
there  remains  but  little  force  in  the  objection. 

Obj.  13.  But  they  were  fo  far  in  covenant  as 
to  have  a  right  to  the  feal. 

Anf.  Circumcifion  was  indeed  entailed  on 
the  feed  of  Abraham,  and  their  fervants.  But 
where  is  any  fuch  entailment  of  Baptifm  upon 
believers'  natural  feedi  The  pricfthood  of  a 
certain  covenant  was  entailed  on  the  tribe  of 
Levi,  and  on  all  their  offspring,  as  you  read, 
Jofhua  i.  8.  Numb.  xxv.  13.  Will  you 
therefore  entail  the  miniftry  of  the  Gofpel  on 


33 

certain  minifters,  and  their  natural  feed  ? 
Further,  as  to  Baptifm,  it  is  plain,  that  the  carnal 
right  of  the  Jews  would  not.  ferve.  "  Think 
not  (faith  John)  to  lay  within  yourfelves,  we 
have  Abraham  for  our  father."  Clearly 
(hewing  that  their  right,  as  children  of  Abraham, 
was  cut  off  by- the  gofpel.  "  Now  the  ax  is  laid 
to  the  root  of  the  tree,  every  tree  that  bringeth 
not  forth  good  fruit,  is  hewn  down  and  caft  into 
the  fire."  And  further  note,  Abraham  had 
a  command  for  circumcifing  his  infants  :  but 
where  is  the  command  for  baptizing  infants, 
the  feed  of  believers  ? 

Obj.  14.  Chrift  faid  fuifer  little  children  to 
come  unto  me,  for  of  fuch  is  the  kingdom  of 
heaven. 

Anf.  The  text  informs  us  plainly,  that  they 

were  not  brought  to  be  baptized,  but  that  Chrift 

ht  lay  his  hands  on  them,  and  blefs  them, 

JV  it.  xix.  13.  Mark  x.  16.  here  is  nothing  of 

B-.;nifm: 

Obj.  15.  But  it  is  faid,  Acts  ii.  39.  "  The 
promife  is  to  you,  and  to  your  children  ?" 

Anf.  Do  fo  much  juftice  to  your  own  foul 
as  to  read  the  text  out ;  and  you  (hall  find  that 
it  is  faid,  "  The  promife  is  to  you  and  to  your 
children,  and  to  all  that  are  afar  off,  even  as 
many  as  the  Lord  our  God  mall  call.*'  You 
fee  now  it  is  to  fuch  as  are  called,  that  the 
promife  belongs.  But  if  you  fay  this  word  caI/9 
relates,  not  to  the  children,  but  to  them  that 
are  afar  off:  I  anfwer,  it  mud  needs  relate  to 


the  children  and  their  parents,  and  all  afar  off 
too.  For  the  promife  is  that  which  you  read 
in  the  16  and  17  verfes,  this  is  that  which  you 
read  in  the  prophet  Joel,  I  will  pour  cut. my  Spirit 
on  all  flejh*  on  your  Jons  and  daughter/.  Joel  ii. 
28.  and  vcr.  32.  on  the  remnant  tvhom  the  Lord 
fnall  call.  The  promife  then  here  fpoken  of, 
is  the  promife  of  the  Holy  Ghoft.  Now  if 
this  promife  be  to  believers'  children,  without 
refpedl  to  their  calling  ;  then  either  the  promife 
doth  fail  ;  but  that  is  a  dreadful  thing  to 
fuppofe  :  or  elfe,  all  the  children  of  believers 
do  partake  of  this  promife  of  the  Spirit.  But 
daily  experience  {hews  the  contrary,  that  many 
believers'  children  are  carnal,  not  having  tne 
Spirit  ;  and  that  the  promife  is  only  fulfilled  to 
as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  is  pleafed  to  call. 

Obj.  16.  But  I  have  been  baptized  in  my 
infancy,  therefore  I  think  I  have  no  need  to  be 
baptized  again  ? 

Anf.  As  one  faith  of  marriage,  it  is  not  the 
bed  that  makes  marriage,  (for  if  fo,  forni- 
nication  were  marriage)  but  a  lawful  confent 
and  covenant,  that  make  marriage  :  fo  I  fay 
of  Baptifm,  it  is  not  water  applied  by  a  minifter 
that  makes  Baptifm,  but  it  is  a  free  confent 
and  fubjeclion  to  Chrift  according  to  rule,  that 
make  Baptifm.  Now  when  thou  waft  an 
infant  thou  gave-ft  no  confent.  Thou  knoweft 
of  no  fuch  thing  but  by  report.  Thou  kneweft 
not  when  it  was  done,  and  therefore  hadft  no 
faith    in  the    ad.      And  no  Go/pel   ordinance 


35 

avails  without  faith;  fo  that  thou  art  yet 
unbaptized.  You  may  perhaps  afk,  what 
defers  were  in  my  infant  Baptifm  ?  why,  jir/l 
there  was  no  rule  to  baptize  thee  whilft  an 
infant.  Further,  thou  waft  no  right  fubject  ; 
for  thou  oughteft  to  have  believed  and  been 
baptized.  Again,  thou  waft  only  fprinkled,  and 
not  buried  in  Baptifm,  as  Chrift  was,  and 
hath  commanded.  Thy  Baptifm  was  only  a 
tradition  of  thy  fore-fathers  ;  but  the  Lord 
Jefus  is  faid  to  have  ihed  his  precious  blood  to 
redeem  from  the  tradition  of  thy  fore-fathers, 
i  Pet.  i.  18,  19. 

"  In  Acts  xix.  thou  wilt  find  about  twelve 
ct  men  who  feem  to  have  had  all  requifites 
"  before  they  were  baptized,  except  hearing 
"  of,  and  believing  in  the  Holy  Ghoft,  verfe  2  ; 
"  and  to  havebeen  baptized  properly, except  that 
"  the  minifter  did  not  ufe  all  the  form  of  words 
which  belong  to  the  adminiftration  ;  for  thofe 
reafons  of  defects,  they  were  rebaptized. 
And  if  thou  hadft  neither  heard,  known, 
"  nor  believed  in  the  Holy  Ghoft  before  thou 
"  wert.  baptized  ;  no,  nor  in  Father,  nor  Son 
"  and  if  the  minifter  committed  any  error,  fuch 
"  as  fprinkling  inftead  of  dipping  thee,  ought- 
"  eft  thou  not  to  have  matters  mended  like 
thofe  twelve  perfons,  rather  than  be  content 
with  imperfect  Baptifm  ?  Nay,  with  no 
Baptifm ;  for  lprinkling  would  not  be 
Baptifm,  hadft  thou  been  a  penitent  and 
"  believer  at  the  time. 


3<5 

Obj,  17.  But  many  lay  fa  much  ftrefs  on 
Baptifm,  that  makes  us  more  backward  to  it. 

Anf  Is  there  more  ftrefs  laid  by  any  than 
by  Chrift,  who  faid  they  rejected  the  counfel 
of  God  againft  themfelves,  not  being  baptized, 
Luke  vii.  29,  30.  And  is  it  not  our  duty 
to  contend  for  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the 
Saints, 

Obj.  18.  The  children  of  believers  are  holy, 
therefore  to  be  baptized. 

Anf  As  it  is  faid  the  children  are  holy,  fo 
it  is  faid  the  unbelieving  hufband  is  holy,  or 
fanclified  by  the  believing  wife.  This  holinefs 
fignifies  no  more  than  the  lawful  ufe  of  marriage. 
For  the  Apoftle  in  that  place  (1  Cor,  7.)  in 
fpeaking  of  marriage,  and  determining  whether 
they  who  believed  fhould  live  with  unbelieving 
hufbands,  or  put  them  away,  1  Cor.  vii.  13. 
His  judgment  was  that  the  believing  fhould  not 
forfake  the  unbelieving  hufband  or  wife ; 
becaufe  they  were  fa  notified  one  by  the  other, 
and  hence  their  children  were  holy.  But  is 
this  a  fufficient  reafon  to  baptize  them  ?  It  is 
faid  Zech.  xiv.  20.  "  There  fhall  be  holinefs  on 
the  horfes  bells,  and  every  pot  in  the  Lord's 
houfe  fhall  be  holy."  Now  do  you  think  this 
is  a  fufficient  warrant  to  baprize  bells,  as  we 
read  in  the  book  of  Martyrs  that  they  did. 
There  is  a  being  holy  for  the  ufe  of  a  believer, 
as  every  creature  of  God  is  fan&ified  by  the 
word  of  God  and  prayer:  And  to  the 
clean  all  things  are  clean,  that  is,    to  their  ufe. 


37 

Thus  unbelieving  hufbands  or  wives  are  holy., 
that  is,  fan&ified  to  the  ufe  of  each  other,  and 
children  are  clean  proceeding  from  that  fanc- 
tified  ufe.  But  if  you  mould  think  believers* 
children  are  inherently  holy,  your  experience 
would  teach  you  to  the  contrary.  Do  we  not 
fee  good  men  have  ungodly  children,  and  bad 
men  have^ holy  children  ?  So  that  holy  mufl 
here  fignify  a  fan&ified  ufe  of  hufband  or  wife 
though  an  unbeliever  :  fo  that  the  children  are 
not  born  in  uncleannefs. 

Obj.  19.  When  at  firfl  circumciiion  began* 
men  of  years  were  circumcifed  ;  but  afterwards 
infants  were  circumcifed  :  So  in  the  gofpel- 
time, when  Baptifm  was  firfl:  adminiflered,  men 
and  women  were  baptized  5  but  afterwards 
infants  were  baptized. 

Anf.  When  God  firfl  commanded  circum- 
cifion,  he  commanded  that  it  mould  be 
adminiflered  to  children,  Gen.  xvii.  10.  But 
when  Chrift  commanded  Baptifm,  he  com- 
manded that  perfons  mould  be  taught,  and 
that  they  mould  believe,  and  be  baptized  ; 
and  never  commanded  to  baptize  children. 
Again,  we  have  the  hiflory  of  the  lives  and  A&s 
of  the  Apoflles  and  primitive  Churches  for 
many  years,  but  no  account  of  one  infant 
baptized.  Paul  was  converted  fome  time  after 
Chrift's  afcenfion,  and  had  been  fourteen  years 
at  leafl  in  Chrift  when  he  wrote  his  fecond 
E  pi  (lie  to  the  Corinthians,  as  appears,  2  Cor. 
xii,  2.    In  thefe   fourteen    years    fure   fome 

E 


3* 

children  were  born,  but  we  read  not  of  orib 
baptized. 

Obj.  so.  Paid  faith  he  was  not  fent  to 
baptize,  but  to  preach,   i  Cor.  i.  17. 

Anf.  but  Paul  did  baptize,  j  Cor.  i.  14,  15. 
He  baptized  Crifpus,  and  Gaius,  and  the  houf- 
hold  of  Stephanus.  Now  what  he  did,  he  did  by 
commiffion  or  prefumption  :  but  he  did  it  not 
by  prefumption,  therefore  by  commiffion. 
He  was  fent  to  preach  as  his  principal  work, 
but  Baptifm  alfo  fell  in  as  a  part  of  his  office. 

Obj.  2 1 .  But  three  thoufand  were  baptized 
in  one  day  ;  how  could  all  thefe  be  dipped  in 
one  day?  They  might  be  fprinkled,  but  not 
dipped. 

Anf.  They  might  be  dipped  :  for  there  were 
twelve  Apoftles,  and  feventy  difciples  for 
Adminiftrators,  as  Luke  x.  1.  Eighty-two 
Adminiflrators  might  well  baptize  three  thou- 
fand in  one  day. 

CHAPTER   IX. 

Believers'  Baptifm  and  Infant  Baptifm  compared. 


1. Believers' 

Baptifm  hath  a  com- 
mand, Mat.  xxviii.  19, 

20. 

2.  Believers' Baptifm 
hath  many  examples, 
A&s  viii.  12.  chap.  ii. 
37>  4i >  42,  &c. 


Infant  Baptifm 

hath  no  command. 


Infant  Baptifm  hath 
no  example  in  Scripture. 


39 


3«  Believers'  Bap- 
tifm is  from  heaven, 
Mat.  xxi.  25. 

4.  Believers'  ^Bap- 
tifm  is  the  counfel  of 
God,    Luke  vii.    29, 

3°' 

5.  Believers'  Bap- 
tifm hath  had,  in  a 
glorious  manner,  the 
approbation  of  God, 
Mat.  iii. 

6.  In  believers'  Bap- 
tifm  the  perfon  bap- 
tized a&s  faith. 

7.  In  believers' Bap- 
tifm  the  baptized  fub- 
je&  themfelves  in  obe- 
dience to  God. 

8.  Believers,  bapti- 
zed know  what  they 
are  doing,  when  bap- 
tized. 

9.  Believers  re- 
member their  Bap- 
tifm. 

10.  Believers  are 
buried  with  Chrifl  by 
Baptifm,  Rom.  vi.  3. 

11.  All  truly  be- 
lievers baptized,  are 
in  the  covenant  of 
grace. 


Infant  Baptifm  fc  of 
men. 

Infant  Baptifm  is  the 
counfel  of  men. 


Infant  Baptifm  has 
never  had  fuch  appro- 
bation of  God. 


But  in  infants'  Bap- 
tifm the  infant  ails  no 
faith. 

But  in  Infani-Bap~ 
tifm  the  infant  fhews  no 
ads  of  its  obedience. 

But  infants  know  not 
any  thing  of  what,  is 
done  when  they  are 
baptized. 

Infants  remember  not 
theirs. 

Infants  are  not  buri* 
edy  but  only  fprinkled. 

All  infants  baptized \ 
are  not  in  the  covenant 
of  grace. 
E  2 


40 


12.  The  prom ife  of 
rcnvflion  of  fins  is 
made  to  believers  bap- 
tized, A&s  ii.  37,  38. 

13.  God  has  pro- 
mifed  that  all  who  be- 
lieve and  are  baptized, 
fliall  be  faved. 

14.  Believers'  re- 
joice when  they  are 
baptized,  A&s  viii.  16. 

15.  Believers'  Bap- 
tl'fm  hath  the  plain 
word  of  God  for  its 
warrant,  Mat.  xi.  19. 

16.  It  may  be  un- 
deniably affirmed  that 
believers  were  bap- 
tized by  the  holy  A- 
poftles. 

17.  All  thofe  who 
baptize  infants,  do 
confefs  believers  were 
baptized  in  the  primi- 
tive age. 

18.  Believers  bap- 
tized have  thereupon 
a  right  to  the  Lord's 
Supper. 

19.  All  Believers 
baptized  are  lively 
(tones  fit  for  God's 
building,  i  Pet.  ii.  15. 


The  promife  of  Re- 
mijjlon  of  fins  is  not 
made  to  infants  bapti- 
zed. 

God  hath  not  pro- 
mifed  that  infants  bap' 
tized  foall  be  faved. 

Infants  weep  when 
they  are  fprinkled. 

Infants'  baptifm  hath 
only  uncertain  confe- 
rences. 

But  it  cannot  be  af- 
firmed that  any1  infant 
was   baptized    by   the 
Apoftles. 

But  they  who  bap- 
tize believers )  cannot 
allow  that  infants  were 
then  baptized. 

Infants  baptized  are 
not  thereupon  to  par- 
take of  the  Lord's- 
Supper. 

But  infants  baptized \ 
are  not  lively  flones  ft 
for  God's  building* 


4* 


20.  Believers  bap- 
tized  by  faith,  build  on 
Chrift  the  foundation. 

21.  Such  as  are 
baptized  on  their  own 
faith,  if  that  faith  be 
true,  fhall  never  per- 
ifli,  John  x.  28. 

22.  Believers  bap- 
tized are  converted. 

23.  Believers  bap- 
tized are  not  the  chil- 
dren of  wrath. 

24.  Believers  at 
their  Bapcifm,  know 
Chrift,  whom  they  put 
on,  to  be  precious, 
1  Pet.  ii.  7. 

25.  Believers  love 
Chrift,  and  will  there- 
fore keep  his  com- 
mandments, John  xiv. 

26.  Believers  bap- 
tized, are  capable  of 
worshipping  God  in 
fpirit  and  truth,  and 
fuch  God  feeks  to 
worfhip  him,  John  iv. 
23,  24. 

27.  Believers'  Bap- 
tifm   mult   ftand,  be- 


But  infants  baptized 
are  built  by  another 
faith. 

But  fuch  as  are  bap- 
tized on  others'  faith 
may  peri/h,  and  that 
borrowed  faith  will  not 
help  them. 

Infants  baptized  are 
not  converted. 

Infants  baptized  may 
be  yet  under  wrath^ 
John  iii.  36. 

But  infants  baptized 
do  not  know  Chrift  to 
be  precious. 


But  infants  are  not 
capable  of  love  to  Chrift^ 
or  purpofes  of  obedience 
to  his  commandments. 

But  infants  baptized 
know  not  what  they 
worfhip. 


Infant  Baptifm  mujl 
fa!l9  becaufe  it  has  not 


42 


caufe  its  foundation  is 
in  God's  word. 

28.  Believers,  bap- 
tized, may  repel  latan, 
faying,  It  is  written, 
They  believed,  and 
were  baptized. 


footing  in  the  word  of 
God. 

But  they  who  were 
baptized  in  infancy  can- 
not fay,  It  is  written^ 
infants  were  baptized  ; 
for  it  is  not  written, and 
therefore  they  want  this 
weapon  againft  fatan. 


CHJPTER   X. 

Some  plain  Scriptures  concerning  Baptifm,  left  to  the 
Judgment  of  the  Reader,  without  any  confequences 
drawn  from  them  by  Man's  wifdom. 

1  HEN  cometh  Jefus  to  John  to  be 
baptized,  Mat.  iii.  13.  v.  15,  And  Jefus  faid, 
fuller  it  to  be  fo,  for  thus  it  becometh  us  ta 
fulfil  all  righteoufnefs,  v,  16.  Jefus  when  he 
was  baptized  went  flraightway  out  of  the  water. 

Mat.  xx i.  25.  The  Baptifm  of  John  was 
it  from  heaven,  or  of  men  ?  if  we  fay  from 
heaven,  he  will  fay,  why  did  ye  not  believe 
in  him  ? 

Luke  xx.  6.  But  if  we  fay  of  men ;  the 
people  will  flone  us. 

Luke  vii.  29.  The  publicans  juftified  God, 
being  baptized. 

Vtt\  30.  But  the  pharifees  and  lawyers 
rejected  the  council  of  God  againft  themfelves, 
not  being  baptized. 


43 

Mat.  xxviii.  19.  Go  teach  all  nations 
baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and 
of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghoft. 

Acls  ii.  38.  Repent  and  be  baptized  every- 
one of  you,  in  the  name  of  Jefus  Chrift. 

Acls  ii.  41.  Then  they  that  gladly  received 
his  word  were  baptized. 

Mark  xvi.  16.  He  that  believeth  and  is 
baptized  mall  be  faved. 

Acts  viii.  12.  And  when  they  believed,  they 
were  baptized  both  men  and  women. 

Acls  viii.  36.  And  the  Eunuch  faid,  here  is 
water,  what  doth  hinder  me  to  be  baptized  ? 

Acls  viii.  37.  And  Philip  faid,  if  thou 
believed,  thou  mayeft. 

Acls  viii.  38.  And  they  went  both  down, 
into  the  water,  both  Philip  and  the  Eunuch, 
and  he  baptized  him. 

Acls  x.  47.  Can  any  man  forbid  water  that 
thefe  mould  not  be  baptized,  that  have  received 
the  Holy  Ghoft  as  well  as  we  ?  and  ver.  48. 
He  commanded  them  to  be  baptized  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord. 

Acls  xvii.  8.  And  Crifpus  the  chief  ruler  of 
the  Synagogue  believed  on  the  Lord- with  all 
hh  houfe,  and  many  of  the  Corinthians  hearing 
believed,  and  were  baptized. 

Acls  xxii.  16.  And  now  why  tafrieft  thou  ? 
arife  and  be  baptized,  and  wafh  away  thy  fins, 
calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord. 

Rom.  vi.  4.  We  areburied  with  himbyBaptifm. 

Gal.  iii.  27.  As  many  as  have  been  baptized 
into  Chrifl:  have  put  on  Chrift. 


44 

i  Pet.  iii.  21.  The  like  figure  whereun to 
Baptifm  doth  fave  us,  Isfc. 

i  Cor.  xii.  13.  By  one  Spirit  we  are  all 
baptized  into  one  body. 

Ads  xvi.  33.  And  he  took  them  the  fame 
hour  of  the  night,  and  warned  their  ftripes, 
and  was  baptized,  he  and  all  his  ftraightway. 
V*  34.  he  believing  in  God  with  all  his  houfe. 

Luke  iii.  21.  Jefus  being  baptized,  the 
heavens  were  opened. 

Luke  iii.  23.  And  Jefus  himfelf  being  about 
thirty  years  of  age. 

John  iii.  23.  John  was  baptizing  in  JEnon 
near  Salim,  becaufe  there  was  much  water. 


CHAPTER    jft. 

Some  perfuafive  Considerations,  by  way  of  Concluflon. 

i.  v><ONSIDER  when  God  gives  to  any  a 
new  heart,  it  is  to  fit  that  perfbn  for  his 
ordinances,  Ezek.  xi.  16,  20.  "  I  will  give 
them  a  new  fpirit,  and  I  will  take  away  the 
heart  of  ftone,  and  give  them  a  heart  of  flefh, 
that  they  may  walk  in  my  ftatutes,  and  keep 
my  ordinances,  and  do  them." 

2.  Confider,  how  dangerous  it  is  to  refift 
an  ordinance  of  God;  to  this  purpofe  read  Luke 
vii.  29,  30.  They  rejected  the  counfel  of  God, 
not  being  baptized. 

3.  Confider,  what  judgments  have  attended 
the  changing  of  God's  ordinances,  Ifaiah  xxiv. 


45 

i,  "  Behold  the  Lord  maketh  the  earth 
empty,  and  turneth  it  up  fide  down.  Why, 
v.  5.  "  They  have  changed  the  ordinance," 
SsV.  When  Chrift  makes  an  ordinance,  which 
can  belong  to  none  but  believers,  and  this  is 
given  to  infants,  is  not  this  a  changing  his 
ordinance  ? 

4.  Confider  what  fell  on  Nadab  and  Abihu^ 
the  fons  of  Aaron^  Lev.  x.  1,2.  They  offered 
what  the  Lord  hath  not  commanded:  it  was 
not  forbid ;  but  that  is  not  enough  to  give 
them  warrant;  it  was  not  commanded.  Infants* 
Baptifm  is  not  forbidden,  we  are  told,  but  it 
is  what  the  Lord  commanded  not. 

5.  Confider  that  if  in  thy  infancy  thou  waft 
not  a  right  fubjecl:,  nor  receivedft  the  ordinance 
in  a  right  manner,  then  thou  oughteft  to  be 
baptized  aright  when  adult. 

6.  Confider  if  what  thou  receivedft  in  thy 
infancy  was  no  Baptifm,  and  thou  haft  not  yet 
been  baptized,  then  thou  liveft  in  the  neglect 
of  a  great  Gofpel- Ordinance.  Wilt  thou  call 
that  obedience  to  this  ordinance,  which  was 
not  thy  a<5t,  and  had  not  thy  confent,  and 
what  thou  knoweft  not  of,  nor  canft  remember 
when  it  was  done,  and  which  thou  hadft  no 
faith  in  ? 

7.  Confider  the  ordinances  of  God  (hould 
be  kept  as  they  were  delivered,  1  Cor.  xi.  12. 
But  Baptifm  was  delivered  to  believers,  never 
to  infants.  God  delivered  circumcifion  to  be 
applied  to  infants,  but  never  delivered  Baptifm 
to  infants. 


46 

8.  There  are  many  who  have  not  fubmitted 
themfelves  to  believers'  Baptifm,  but  do  deny 
Baptifm  to  their  infants.  Let  fuch  confider, 
if  their  own  Baptifm  was  fufficient  for  them- 
felves, why  do  they  deny  it  to  their  infants : 
or  if  it  be  not  fufficient  for  their  children,  why 
do  they  reckon  it  fufficient  for  themfelves  ? 
■ — How  long  halt  ye  between  two  opinions? 

9.  Confider  that  the  baptizing  of  believers 
is  undoubtedly  warranted  by  God's  word : 
the  baptizing  of  infants,  at  bed  is  doubtful. 
Infants'  Baptifm  has  been  often  difputed ;  but 
when  was  believers'  Baptifm  difputed  ?  It  is 
in  words  at  length  exprefTed  in  Scripture,  They 
believed  and  were  baptized.  Now  is  it  not 
better  to  go  in  a  clear  and  certain  way,  than 
in  a  dark  and  doubtful  way? 

10.  Confider  there  are  multitudes  of  exam- 
ples of  believers'  Baptifm,  as  may  be  feen  in 
Chapter  III.  of  this  book.  But  there  is  not 
one  example  of  infants'  Baptifm  in  facred 
Scripture. 

1 1 .  Confider,  if  the  falvation  of  thy  foul 
dependethon  the  true  anfweringof  this  quefiion, 
whether  it  is  believers'  or  infants'  Baptifm  that 
is  revealed  in  the  Scriptures  ?  Wouldefl  thou 
not  anfwer,  believers  ? 

12.  Confider  that  as  birth-right  gave  a  title 
to  circumcifion  under  the  law,  fo  birth-right 
gave  a  right  to  the  Prieflhood  alfo.  Now  if 
from  thence  you  would  entail  Baptifm  on  the 
feed  of  believers,  why  may  you  not  as  well 
entail  the  miniftry  on  the  pofterity  of  mmifters  ?  it 


47 

would  feem  ftrange  logic  to  fay,  the  preachers* 
feed  under  the  Gofpel,  mull  not  have  lefs 
privilege  than  the  PricuV  feed  had  under  the 
law,  and  therefore  they  mud  have  the  miniftry 
entailed  on  them. 

13.  Confider  that  we  are  not  to  think  of 
any  thing,  any  more  than  of  any  perfon,  above 
what  Is  written,  1  Cor.  iv.  6.  Now  if  infant- 
Baptifm  be  not  judged  in  Scripture  to  be  an 
ordinance,  do  not  you  judge  fcdto  be  an 
ordinance. 

14.  Confider  that  Chrift  was  faithful  in 
all  his  houfe,  Heb.  iii.  5.  6.  Now  if  it  had 
been  his  Father's  will  that  infants  fhould  be 
baptized,  furely  he  would  have  been  fo  faith- 
ful as  to  have  left  us  one  word  in  his  bleffed 
Scriptures. 

15.  Confider  that  it  was  the  commendation 
of  Mofes,  the  fervant  of  the  Lord,  that  he  did 
all  things  according  to  the  pattern  (hewn  him 
in  the  mount,  Exod.  xxv.  40.  And  mall  not 
the  fervants  of  the  Lord  do  all  according  to  the 
pattern  fhewn  them  by  our  bleffed  Saviour  in 
the  new  Teftament  ?  but  according  to  the 
pattern  left  us  there,  faith  fhould  go  before 
Baptifm. 

16.  Confider  whether  they  who  eftablifh  an 
ordinance  on  doubtful  confequences,  without 
any  plain  text,  would  grant  the  papifts,  and 
fome  others,  the  fame  liberty?  as  for  example, 
becaufe  it  is  faid,  let  all  things  be  done  decently, 
and  in  order,  fhall  men  have  a  liberty  of  making 
what  order  or  ceremonies  they  pleafe,  becaufe 


48 

they  appear  decent  or  orderly,   and  fo  are 
proved  by  a  confequence  from  this  place  ? 

17.  Confider,  that  feeing  the  Scripture  is 
fo  exact  in  fetting  down  the  fmaller  circumftances 
of  perfons  baptized,  as  in  Acts  xvi.  13,  14. 
when  the  Baptifm  of  Lydia  is  related,  the  Holy 
Ghoft  remarks  the  time,  Sabbath  day;  the 
place,  by  a  river  fide;  the  cuftom  of  the  place, 
where  prayer  was  wont  to  be  made;  the  company, 
women;  the  name  of  the  perfon,  Lydia;  her 
trade,  a  feller  of  purple  \  the  place  of  her  abode, 
the  city  ^Thyatira;  her  devotion,  a  worfhipper 
of  God;  her  action,  jhe  heard  God's  word;  the 
effect  of  that,  God  opened  her  heart;  the 
inftrument  by  which  he  opened  her  heart,  by 
words  fpoken  by  Paul.  Now  confider,  I  fay, 
whether  this  Spirit  that  was  fo  exact  in  record- 
ing all  the  fmalleft  circumftances  of  Baptifm, 
would  not  in  fome  place  or  other  have  let  us 
know  if  any  infant  had  been  baptized  :  but  not 
one  word  in  any  place,  that  informs  us  that  an 
infant  was  baptized:  why  fhould  God  have 
been  thus  filent,  if  it  had  been  his  will  that  it 
fhould  be  done  ? 

18.  Confider  that  we  own  but  one  lawgiver, 
"  There  is  but  one  law-giver,  who  is  able  to 
fave  and  to  deitroy,"  'James  iv.  12.  Again 
Ifaiah  33.  22.  it  is  written,  "  The  Lord  is 
our  judge.,  the  Lord  is  our  law-giver."  Now 
where  hath  this  Lord  given  a  law  for  baptizing 
infants  ?  and  if  this  one  law-giver  has  not  given 
a  law  for  baptizing  them,  who  may  make  fuch 
a  law  ? 


49 

19.  Confider  whether  the  giving  infants 
the  Lord's  fupper,  ufing  God-Fathers  and 
God-Mothers,  and  the  crofs,  with  many  other 
ceremonies,  which  are  now  counted  fuperftitious 
by  many  pedobaptifts,  had  not  the  lame  rife 
and  foundation  as  the  baptizing  of  infants  ? 

20.  Confider  whether  it  be  fafe  to  admit  the 
uncertain  conclufions  men  make  from  Scriptures 
contrary  to  the  exprefs  texts  ? 

21.  Confider  if  it  mould  be  faid  to  thofe 
who  baptize  infants,  as  in  Jfa.  i.  12.  Who  hath 
required  thefe  things  at  your  hands?  what  would 
they  anfwer? 

22.  Confider  whether  any  other  Gofpel  ordi- 
nance is  delivered  in  more  plain  words  inScripture? 

23.  Let  thofe  who  neglect  Baptifm,  confider 
whether,  not  being  baptized,  they  do  not  reject 
the  counfel  of  God  according  toLukevii.  29,30. 

24.  Confider  whether  they  who  pra&ife 
Infant  Baptifm  do  not  teach  that  Baptifm  is  a 
fign  of  regeneration ;  and  whether  they  can 
believe  that  all,  or  any  of  the  infants  baptized 
are  regenerated  \  if  not,  why  do  they  give 
them  the  fign  ? 

25.  Confider  whether  Abraham  durfl  have 
circumcifed  his  child  if  God  had  not  exprefsly 
commanded  him  to  do  fo ;  then  why  fhould  any 
baptize  a  child  without  an  exprefs  command? 

26.  Confider  whether  we  are  not  to  prefs 
after  the  purity  of  ordinances,  and  whether 
thofe  ordinances  are  not  mod  pure  which  are 
pracYifed  moll  exactly  agreeable  to  the  word 
of  God  ? 


5° 

1j.  Confider  whether  that  bleffed  voice,  ivell  done  good  and  faithful 
fer-vant,  will  not  beft  belong  to  thofe  who  have  faithfully  done  what 
Chr'fl  hath  commanded,  and  as  he  hath  commanded  it  ? 

In  fine  reader,  I  befeech  thee  to  confider  what  hath  been  faid  in 
this  matter  :  and  the  glorious  God  of  truth  give-  thee  the  Spirit  of 
truth,  which  may  lead  thee  into  all  truth,  and  build  thee  up  in  the 
fame,  and  give  thee  an  inheritance  among  them  that  are  lanctified  : 
and  as  in  iincerity  with  unfeigned  love  to  God  and  thy  foul,  theie 
things  have  been  written  ;  fo  in  Sincerity  I  pray  that  the  very  God 
and  Father  of  our  Lord  ftfus,  may  fanctify  thee  throughout,  in 
body,  foul,  and  fpirit,  and  give  thee  a  heart  to  fearch  whether 
thefe  things  be  fo. 

THE   END. 


Brief  Thoughts  on  the  Subject  and  Mock  of  Baptism* 

SUBJECT'. 

.As  early  as  'cheApoftles'  days, 

The  man  of  fin  began  to  work, 
And  Babylon's  myfterious  ways 

Were  known  in  fecrct  then  to  lurk  *.    [*  a  Theff.  :i;  y,. 
Two  cent'ries  fcarce  had  ran  their  round, 

£re  Babel's  wails  were  feen  to  rife  ; 
And  men's  devices  foon  were  found 

O'er  heav'n's  pure  truths  to  tyrannize. 
That  babifh  rite,  among  the  reft, 

Of  chrift'ning  infams,  then  began ; 
And  through  the  churches  in  the  weft. 

By  fwift  degrees  like  torrents  ran. 
Without  a  lliadow  of  a  proof, 

This  childifh  cuftom  ftill  prevails ; 
Thro'  prejudice  men  ftand  aloof, 

For  fcripture  teft  entirely  fails. 
"When  John  baptiz'd  in  Jordan's  ft  ream,.. 

And  preach' d  repentance  to  mankind, - 
And  all  the  region  fiock'd  to  him, 

We  not  a  word*  of  infants  find. 
"When  Chrift  our  Lord  fojourn'd  below, 

He  t^ugnt  his  will  without  difguife  j 
Yet  r.ot  a  hint  from  him  did  flow, 

That  men  their  infants  fhould  baptize- 
When  o'er  the  grave  he  conqu'ring  rofe, 

And' gave  his  laft,  but  full  command, 
Th'  Apoftles'  conduct,  clearly  fhews 

How  they  their  Lord  did  underitand. 
Jnfpir'd  by  love,  they  fwiftly  flew ; 

The  nations  taught  where'er  they  came;' 
And  converts,  countkfs  as  the  dew, 

Were  baptia'd  m  their  matter's  nams; 


5» 

But  'midft  the  thoufands  that  were  taughty 

The  thoufands  that  baptized  were, 
We  cannot  find  one  i«fa»t  brought 

This  gofpel  ordinance  to  Stare, 
How  wond'rous  ftrange,  if  heav'n  defign  d 

Infants  as  fubjects  truly  fit 
To  be  baptiz'd,  that  we  ean't  find 

One  inftance  giv'n  in  holy  writ  *  ! 
But  thus  it  is  : — yet  men  will  try 

To  rack  their  brains  for  reafons  found ; 
And  when  the  Bible  proofs  deny, 

Tradition  makes  their  only  ground ! 
How  vain  the  proof  which  this  fupplies  ! 

How  rank  of  whorifh  Rome  it  fmelk! 
If  once  allow 'd,  we  muft  baptize 

Not  only  infants,  but  our  bells. 
Traditions  are,  at  belt,  but  vain  ; 

Our  fathers  err'd,  and  fo  do  we  ; 
The  fcriptures  only  can  explain 

What  God,  in  truth,  requires  of  thee. 
Cuftoms  and  prejudice  enfnare 

And  fetter  the  incautious  mind  ; 
Twas  thefe  did  Babel's  temple  rear, 

' r\  is  thefe  do  ftill  the  nations  blind. 
Caft  off  your  chainsj  ye  heav'n-born  minds, 

Exert  your  native  freedom  then  ; 
Search  for  yourfelves,  what  God  deiigns*- 

And  fhun  the  futile  fchemes  of  men. 

MODE. 

HCW  vain  the  fons  of  Adam's  race  ! 

To  what  prefumption  giv'n  ! 
They  folly  fet  in  wifdom's  place, 

And  change  the  rites  of  heav'n. 
When  John  baptiz'd  our  gracious  Lord 

In  Jordan's  flowing  ftream, 
Of  fprinkling  fpake  he  not  a  word, 

As  fome  would  fondly  dream. 
Both  Philip  and  the  eunuch  too 

Into  the  water  went  ; 
With  fprinkling  they  had  nought  to  do, 

To  dip  was  their  intent. 
In  Enon's  wave,  to  Salem  near, 

In  facred  writ  we're  told, 
Becaufe  there  was  much  water  there, 

Did  John  baptize  of  old. 
If  fprinkling  then  had  been  in  ufe, 

A  bowl  had  done  as  well ; 
*  There  is  not  a  more  felf-evident  truth,  than  the  entire  filence  of 
fcripture  refpc&ing  infant  baptifm, 


52 

Sprinkling,  therefore,  is  an  abufe 

'Of  what  the  fcripturestell. 
Baptifm,  in  the  facred  code, 

Chrift's  burial  points  to  you  ; 
Hisrefurredtion,  by  this  mode, 

Is  alfo  figur'd  too. 

But  fprinkling  cannot  reprefent 

Thefe  wonders  to  the  mind  ; 

Nor  was  it  ever  Chrift's  intent 

It  mould  the  conference  bind. 

Search  where  you  will,  there's  not  a  hint 

In  all  the  fcripturesgiv'n, 
That  by  baptifm  fprinkling 's  meant, 

As  the  grand  law  of  heav'n. 
If  to  baptize,  in  native  greek, 

Defigns  to  dip  or  plunge, 
Why  fhould  we  other  meanings  feek, 

And  the  true  fenfe  expunge  ? 
The  various  ways  which  men  invent, 

Can  no  true  peace  afford  ; 
God  furely  will  fome  day  refent 

Such  freedom  with  his  word. 
While  others  men's  devices  own, 

And  to  their  fchemes  agree ; 
Search  thou  the  word,  for  that  alone 
In  truth  *  can  fettle  thee. 
*  Truth  is  certainly  one  Ample  uniform  thing,  while  error  it 
multifarious,  and  admits  cf  infinite  diverfity.  This,  J  have  tkought, 
is  «he  reafon  that  Pedobaptifts  differ  fo  among  themfelves  refpe&ing 
the  fubjecl,  mode,  ufe,  and  end  of  baptifm.  They  depart  from 
the  only  criterion  that  can  fettle  the  point:  for  if  they  attended 
limply  to  plain  fcripture  and  matter  of  fact,  there  would  not  Le 
fuch  diverfity  among  them.  There  are  no  points  of.  doctrine  or 
difcipline  more  clearly  laid  down  in  the  facred  records,  than  the 
ordinance  of  baptifm  ;  there  being  nothing  vague,  uncertain,  or 
indeterminate  reflecting  it  i  confequently,  this  diverfity  has  not  its 
foundation  in  fcripture,  but  merely  from  cuftom  and  prejudice  ;  and 
1  have  often  thought,  that,  did  not  thefe  blind  their  eyes  in  a 
fuperlative  degree,  it  would  be  impoffible  for  them  to  believe  their 
own  arguments  and  reafonings  on  the  fubject. 

Many  of  the  principal  doctrines  of  the  ^omiih  church,  fuch  as 
the  facrifice  of  the  mafs,  tranfubftantiation,.  purgatory,  &c.  admit 
of  as  dca?  rroof  from  fcripture  as  infant  fprinkling,  and  would 
follow  from  the  like  manr.er  of  arguing  with  the  Pedobaptifts  oa 
this  fu!; jedt.      gut  >  I  this,  I  think  it  demonftrably  evident, 

that  if  it  were  poflible  for  men  to  come  to  the  fcriptures  diverted  of 
every  bias  ar.d  prejudice  arifing  froi.        Lorn,  education,  &c.  and 
;   to  fearch  for  triu'.i   en    th  re  would   not  be  * 

Jedob.-.ptift  in  the  whole  chcle  of  the  Cbriftian  world.         W.  T* 


THE 

MODE  AND  SUBJECTS 

OF 

BAPTISM 

EXAMINED, 


IN 


SEVEN  SERMONS. 

TO   WHICH   IS  ADDED, 

A  BRIEF  HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTISTS. 


by  daniei/merrill,  a.  m. 

PASTOR  OF   THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST  IN  SEDGWICK, 


Doth  our  law  judge  any  man  before  it  hear  him,  and  know  what  lie 
doeth  ?     Nicodemus.  John  vii.  51. 

Whosoever  he  be  of  you  that  forsaketh  not  all  that  he  hath,  he  cannot 
be  my  disciple.  Jesus  Christ. 


THIRD  EDITION. 


BURLINGTON,  NEW-JERSEY, 
PRINTED  AND   SOLD  BY  STEPHEN  C.  USTICK. 

1805. 


TO  THE  READER. 


FELLOW  TRAVELLER  TO  ETERNITY, 

I  OU  and  I  are  the  offspring  of  God. 
The  period  of  our  return  to-him  fwiftly  approaches. 
Then  the  motive  1  have  had  in  writing,  and  which 
you  fhall  have  had  in  reading,  will  both  be  known. 
How,  and  how  far,  the  following  pages  will  affect 
my  prefent  and  future  life,  is  with  the  Lord. 
How  far  they  fhall  affect  thine,  is  alfo  with  Him. 
One  thing  is  certain  :  the  truth  of  what  I  have 
written  will  be  foon  known.  You  are  willing  to 
know  it  now,  provided  you  know  the  value  of 
the  gofpel,  and  pollers  an  heart  humbled  by  its 
doctrines. 

Reader,  be  not  offended  at  what  I  have 
written,  till  you  be  fure  it  is  falfe.  Do  thyfelf 
no  harm.  Read,  confider,  compare  every  part, 
and  the  whole  with  divine  truth,  in  fuch  a  manner 
and  fpirit,  as  fhall  yield  thee  a  pleafing  reflection 
in  the  world  to  come. 

If  the  fubjedt,  as  here  prefented,  be  true,  it  is 
a  ferious  truth.      If  an  error,  it  is  a  ferious  one. 


IV 


It  nearly  concerns  the  kingdom  of  Emmanuel, 
to  whofe  pleafure  and  mercy  the  whole  is  cheer- 
fully refigned, 

By,  Reader, 

Thy  Servant,  for  Jefusfake, 

The  AUTHOR. 
Sedgwick,  Dec.  27,  1804. 


THE 

MODE  AND  SUBJECTS  OF  BAPTISMi 

SERMON  L 

JSSt 

MATTHEW  XXVIII.  19,  20. 

Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Hnty-Gfroit ; 
teaching  them  to  obferve  all  things  whatfoever  I  have  com- 
manded you  :  And,  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  uiv.o  the 
end  of  the  world.     Amen, 

IT  hath  pleafed  the  Father  of  Mercies  to  be- 
ftow  on  fallen  man  a  revelation  from  heaven.  In  it 
is  contained  the  fcheme  of  grace,  which  brings  life 
and  immortality  to  light.  It  (hows  the  way  by  which 
to  efcape  the  wrath  to  come,  and  to  find  the  favor 
of  God.  All  fcripture  is  given  by  his  infpiration, 
and  is  profitable  for  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  cor- 
rection, for  inftruction  in  righteoufnefs  ;  that  the 
man  of  God  may  be  perfect,  thoroughly  furnilhed 
unto  all  good  works. 

Till  the  human  heart  be  humbled,  in  meafure,  man 
feels  not  his  need  of  divine  teaching  ;  nor  will  he 
make  the  fcriptures  the  man  of  his  connfel.  But, 
my  brethren  and  people,  it  is  doubtlefs  the  cafe,  that 
many  of  you  pofTefs  a  willingnefs  to  have  your  prin- 
ciples and  practice  fquared  by  the  word  and  teftimony 
of  Jefus  Chriit.  My  text  contains  fome  of  the  laft 
words  of  our  great  High  Pried.  It  is  the  general 
orders  which  he  gave  his  firft  apoftles,  and  left  for 


2  The  Mode  and  Subjects         [Serm.  I. 

the  iiiil ruction,  practice  and  comfort  of  all  their  fuc- 
ceffors,  to  the  end  of  the  world.  In  the  verfe  which 
precedes  my  text,  Chrift  informs  us,  that  all  power 
in  heaven  and  in  earth  is  given  unto  him.  His 
words,  therefore,  are  clothed  with  authority.  May 
we  hear,  and  fear,  and  be  obedient.  Where  the 
word  of  a  king  is,  there  is  power  :  and  who  may 
fay  unto  the  King  of  Zion,  What  doft  thou  ? 

So  far  as  we  be  chriflians,  all  that  is  necefTary  to 
enforce  obedience  is,  to  know  what  Chrift  would 
have  us  to  do.  Perhaps  not  a  palTage  in  all  the  ora- 
cles of  truth  contains  more  extenfive  inftru&ion  than 
do  the  words  of  my  text.  The  commands  are  ex- 
ceedingly broad  ;  the  Baptifmal  Inftitution  compre- 
hends all  obedient  difciples  ;  and  the  comforting 
promife  is  durable  as  the  world. 

In  my  text,  Chrift  Jefus,  the  head  of  the  church 
and  Lord  of  all,  conftituted  his  prefent  and  fucceed- 
ing  difciples  to  be  apoftles  unto  all  nations.  It  con- 
tains their  commiiiion,  and  general  and  particular 
orders.     In  it  they  are  directed — * 

I.  To  go  and  difcipie  all  nations. 

II.  To  baptize  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghoft. 

III.  He  directs  thefe  newly  conftituted  apoftles, 
and  all  their  fuccefTors,  to  teach  their  baptized  dif- 
ciples to  obferve  all  things  whatfoever  he  had  given 
in  commandment. 

Lastly,  For  their  encouragement  and  comfort,  he 
adds,  And  lo,  I  am  with  you  alvyay,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world.  Amen. 

I  fuppofe  it  will  be  expedient,  and  with  me  it  is 
an  indifpenfable  duty,  that  I  lay  each  of  thefe  pro- 
portions as  fairly  and  as  fully  before  you  as  I  can. 
But  I  (hall  not  obferve  the  order  in  which  they  lie  in 
my  text,  which  is  as  I  have  juft  ftated  them.      For  I 


Serm.  I.]  of  Baptism.  3 

have  many  things  to  fay  unto  you,  in  agreement  with 
my  text,  but  fear  that  you  are  not,  all  of  you,  able 
to  bear  them  now.  We  dial!  therefore  begin  with  the 

II.  Which  contains  ChriiVs  command  to  baptize, 
in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghoft,  thofe  who  fhall  be  difcipled  of  all 
nations. 

Nor  do  I  purpofe  to  call  your  attention,  at  this 
time,  to  the  whole  which  is  implied  in  this  propofi- 
tion.  But  what  I  purpofe  is,  to  define  a  few  words 
which  appertain  to  the  ordinance,  and  then  collecl: 
the  fcripture  account  of  baptifm,  with  fome  other 
texts,  which  may  throw  light  upon  the  fubjeft.  Af- 
terwards, in  difcourfes  which  may  follow,  I  may 
produce  evidence  that  my  defmitionof  baptifm  isaccu- 
rate  and  juft ;  and  (how  how  the  apoilles  and  primi- 
tive chriftians  underftood  this  matter,  and  how  they 
practiced.  When  this  is  done,  it  will  be  eailly  (cen 
what  is  the  outward  and  vifible  part  of  baptifm  ;  and 
then  the  purport,  end  and  defign  of  the  mftitution 
may  call  for  fome  attention. 

Before  I  proceed  to  open,  ill  nitrate  and  confirm 
thefe  particulars,  I  have  feveral  things  to  fay  unto 
you.  For  I  wiih  you  to  attend  to  the  fubject.  with- 
out partiality  and  without  hypocrify.  I  pray  God 
to  remove  darknefsand  all  prejudice  from  your  minds, 
that  you  may,  indeed,  come  to  the  law  and  to  the 
teftimony  of  Jeius  Chrift  in  this  matter. 

You  will  confider  me  asunder  the  flrongeft  worldly 
inducements  to  continue  to  believe  and  practice  as  I 
have  heretofore  done  ;  for  fhould  I,  after  mature 
confideration,  be  conftrained  to  believe  and  practice 
differently,  you  will  be  releafed  from  all  legal  obli- 
gations to  afford  me  any  farther  fupport;  my  relation  > 
will,  the  mod  of  them,  probably  be  greatly  fhocked, 
and  difpleafed  at  the  report :  many,  whom  I  highly 


4  The  Mode  and  Subjects         [Scrm.I. 

value  as  chriftians,  and  numbers  of  them  zealous 
preachers  of  the  gofpel,  will,  it  may  be,  confider  me 
as  loft,  and  worfe  than  loft,  to  the  church  and  world  : 
and,  befides  this,  multitudes  will,  no  doubt,  fay  all 
manner  of  evil  againft  me.  All  this  being  true, 
with  a  thoufand  other  connected  fm all er  evils,  and 
nothing  of  a  worldly  nature  in  profpect,  fave  what  is 
contained  in  the  promife  of  jefus  Chrift,  you  cannot 
but  conclude  that  I  (hall  proceed  no  farther  in  this 
matter  than  I  am  obliged  to,  in  following  the  Lamb 
of  God  v/hitherfoever  he  goeth. 

Having  laid  thus  much  with  refpedt  to  myfelf,  I 
will  ftill  add,  that,  jfhould  a  change  in  my  belief  and 
practice,  refpecting  the  fubject  on  hand,  bring  me  to 
;i  more  full  belief  and  practice  of  the  truth,  I  fhail, 
on  the  whole,  be  a  gainer,  llvd,  fiiould  a  change 
take  place,  and  1  be  called  to  fuftain  ail  the  evils 
which  I  may  calculate  upon,  and  after  all  be  plunged 
myfelf  into  a  hurtful  and  bewildering  error,  furely  all 
the  meek  and  lowly  in  heart  would  rather  comrnife- 
rate  than  revile  me. 

Another  thing  I  would  mention  to  you,  fo  that 
the  fubject  may,  if  it  polubly  can,  meet  your  minds 
without  prejudice.  You  ought  not  to  fix  your 
indgments,  nor  found  your  belief,  upon  the  argu- 
ments or  confefhons  of  great  and  good  men,  any 
farther  than  fuch  arguments  and  confeffions  are  con- 
formed wich  the  fcriptures  of  truth.     Should  we 

arken'to  what  the  great  eft  and  heft  of  men  have 
confeft  andafTirmed  of  the  fubject  which  we  are  about 
to  confider,  and  have  our  belief  and  practice  corref- 
ponding  with  what  they  have  written,  the  matter 
would,  moft  evidently,  go  againft  what  we  have,  in 
lime  paft,  both  believed  and  practiced.  For  they 
have  very  generally,  or  very  many  of  them,  if  not 
all  of  them,  confeffed  or  affirmed,  however  their 


Serm.  I.]  of  Baptism.  £ 

practice  may  have  been,  that  immerfion  was  the  mode 
practiced  by  the  apoftles  and  primitive  church.  This 
I  purpoie  to  prove  to  you  in  its  proper  place. 

What  I  have  more  to  add,  before  I  proceed  to  the 
main  bufinefs  is,  to  (late  a  few  plain  truths. 

i.  Baptiftn  is  a  pofitive  inftitution,  about  which 
we  can  know  nothing,  as  to  its  being  a  chriftian  or- 
dinance, but  from  what  Chrift,  and  thofe  infpired 
by  his  Spirit  have  taught  us. 

2.  All  which  we  are  required  to  believe  and  prac- 
tice, with  refpeft  to  the  chriftian  ordinance  of  baptifm, 
is  declared  to  us  by  Jefus  Chrift  and  his  forerunner 
and  apoftles. 

3.  When  Jefus Chrift  firft  inftituted  the  ordinance 
of  baptifm,  he,  no  doubt,  delivered  his  mind  fo 
clearly  and  fully  upon  the  fubjecl,  that  his  immediate 
difciples  and  apoftles  underftood  and  practiced  as  he 
would  have  them. 

4.  Every  thing  which  hath,  by  the  precepts  and 
commandments  of  men,  been  added  fince,  is  diftincl: 
from  the  ordinance,  and  makes  no  part  of  it. 

5.  No  man,  or  body  of  men,  have  any  more  au- 
thority to  add  to  this  ordinance,  or  10 "diminifli  from 
it,  than  thev  have  to  inftitute  a  new  one  and  call  it 
Chrift's. 

6.  Whenever,  and  wherever,  this  ordinance  is  fo 
changed,  as  to  lofe  the  intent  of  the  inftitutor,  then 
and  there  the  ordinance  is  loft,  and  becomes  no 
chriftian  ordinance  at  all. 

Having  laid  thefe  preparatory  obfervations,  re- 
marks and  plain  truths  before  you,   we  proceed  to 
"  conf.der  thefubject.  now  on  hand,  which  is — 

Chrift's  command  to  baptize,  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghoft, 
thofe  who  fliafl  be  diiiipled  of  all  nations. 

What  is  propofcv!  for  the  prefent  difcourfe  is — 

b  2 


€  The  Mode  and  Subjects         £Serm.  f. 

i.  To  define  a  few  words  which  appertain  to  the 
ordinance  of  baptifm.     Then — 

ii.  To  collect  the  fcripture  account  of  baptifm, 
together  with  fome  other  texts,  which  may  throw 
light  upon  the  fubjecl.  Afterwards,  in  fome  follow- 
ing difcourfes,  we  may — 

in.  Produce  evidence  that  my  definition  of  bap- 
tifm is  accurate  and  jufl.     Then  fhow — 

iv.  How  the  apoilles  and  primitive  church  under- 
ftood  this  matter,  and  how  they  practiced.  When 
this  is  done,  it  will  be  eafily  feen — 

v.  What  is  the  outward  and  vifible  part  of  chrif- 
tian  baptifm.     Then — 

Lastly.  The  purport,  end  and  defign  of  the  bap- 
tifmal  inflitution  may  call  for  our  attention. 

Agreeably  to  what  is  propofed,  we  are— 

i.  To  define  a  few  words  which  appertain  to  the 
ordinance  of  baptifm.     Thefe  are — 

i.  BoL7rTiwf>ioY  (bapihtericn)  Greek  ;  baptisterium 
and  lavacru??i,  Latin;  a  font,  a  bath,  a 'walking 
place,  a  veffel  to  wafk  the  body  in  ;  EngJifli. 

2.  BaVr/r^a  and  /Sa^rT^.of  (baptisma  and  baptis- 
mos)  Greek  ;  baptisma  and  loth,  alfo  ablutia  saura^ 
Latin  ;  baptifm,  waffling,  facred,  ceremonial  walk- 
ing ;  Englifh. 

3.  Bocttt/sjk  (baptistes)  Greek  ;  baptista,  Latin  \ 
one  who  dips,  a  baptift  ;  Englifh. 

4.  BclttJiZu  (baptizo)  Greek  ;  baptizo,  mergo,  Iavo9 
Latin  ;  to  baptize,  to  dip  all  over,  to  wafli ;  Englifh. 

5.  Aovq  {loud)  Greek  ;  lavo,  Latin  ;  to  wafk,  to 
rinfe,  to  batke  ;  Englifh. 

11.  We  are  to  collect  the  fcripture  account  of  bap- 
tifm, together  with  fome  other  texts  which  may 
throw  light  upon  the  fubjec"t. 

We  will  begin  with  thofe  paiTages  which  fpeak  of 
the  baptifm  of  John. 


Serm.  I.]  of  Baptism.  7 

i.  Matth.  hi.  5,  6,  7.  Then  went  out  to  him 
Jerufalem  and  all  Judea,  and  all  the  region  round 
about  Jordan,  and  were  baptized  of  him  in  Jordan, 
-confefling  their  fins.  But  when  he  faw  many  of  the 
Pharifees  and  Sadduceescome  to  his  baptifm,  he  faid 
unto  them,  O  generation  of  vipers,  &c. 

2.  Verfe  11.  I  indeed  baptize  you  with  water 
unto  repentance,  &c. 

3.  Verfes  13,  14,  15,  16.  Then  cometh  Jefus 
from  Galilee  to  Jordan,  unto  John,  to  be  baptized 
of  him  :  but  John  forbade  him,  faying,  I  have  need 
to  be  baptized  of  thee,  and  comeft  thou  to  me  ?  and 
Jefus,  anfwering,  faid  unto  him,  Suifer  it  to  be  fo 
now,  for  thus  it  becometh  us  to  fulfil  all  righteouf- 
nefs :  then  he  fuffered  him.  And  Jefus,  when  he 
was  baptized,  went  up  ftraightway  out  of  the  water. 

4.  Matth.  xxi.  25,  26,  27.  The  baptifm  of  John, 
whence  was  it.  from  heaven  or  of  men  ?  And  they 
reafoned  with  themfelves,  faying,  If  we  mould  fay 
from  heaven,  he  will  fay  unto  us,  Why  did  ye  not 
then  believe  him  ?  But,  if  we  mail  fay  of  men,  we 
fear  the  people,  for  all  hold  John  as  a  prophet.  And 
they  anfwered  Jefus  and  faid,  We  cannot  tell,  &c. 

5.  Mark  i.  4,  5.  John  did  baptize  in  the  wilder- 
nefs,  and  preach  the  baptifm  of  repentance  for  the 
remimon  of  fins.  And  there  went  out  unto  him  all 
the  land  of  Judea,  and  they  of  Jerufalem,  and  were 
all  baptized  of  him  in  the  river  of  Jordan,  confefling 
their  fms. 

6.  Verfes  8,  9,  10.  I  indeed  have  baptized  you 
with  water — And  it  came  topafs  in  thofe  days,  that 
Jefus  came  from  Nazareth  of  Galilee,  and  was  bap- 
tized of  John  in  Jordan,  and  firaightway  coming 
up  out  of  the  water,  &c. 

7.  Mark  xi.  30.  The  baptifm  of  John,  was  it 
from  heaven  or  of  men  ? 


t  *The  Mode  and  Subjects         [Serm.  I. 

8.  Luke  iii.  3.  And  he  came  into  all  the  country 
about  Jordan,  preaching  the  baptifm  of  repentance 
for  the  remiffion  of  fins. 

9.  Verfes  7,  8.  Then  faid  he  to  the  multitude 
that  came  forth  to  be  baptized  of  him,  O  generation 
of  vipers— bring  forth  therefore  fruits  meet  for 
repentance. 

10.  Verfe  12.  Then  came  alfo  publicans  to  be 
baptized. 

1 1.  Verfe  16.  I  indeed  baptize  you  with  water. 

12.  Verfe  21.  Now  when  all  the  people  were 
baptized,  it  came  to  pafs  that  Jefus  alfo,  being  bap- 
tized, &c. 

13.  Luke  vii.  29,  30.  And  all  the  people  that 
heard  him,  and  the  publicans,  juftified  God,  being 
baptized  with  the  baptifm  of  John.  But  the  Pha- 
rifees  and  lawyers  rejected  the  counfel  of  God  againft 
ihemfelves,  being  not  baptized  of  him. 

14.  Luke  xx.  4.  The  baptifm  of  John,  was  it 
from  heaven,  or  of  men  ? 

15.  John  i.  25,  26.  Why  baptized:  thou,  then, 
if  thou  be  not  that  Chrift,  nor  Elias,  neither  that 
prophet  ?  John  anfwered  them,  faying,  I  baptize 
with  water. 

16.  Verfe  28.  Beyond  Jordan,  where  John  was 
baptizing. 

ij.  Verfe  31.  That  he  fliould  be  made  manifefl 
to  Ifrael :  therefore  am  I  come  baptizing  with  water. 

18.  Verfe  33.  He  that  fent  me  to  baptize  with 
water. 

19.  John  iii.  23.  And  John  alfo  was  baptizing  in 
Enon,  near  to  Salim,  becaufe  there  was  much  water 
there  ;  and  they  came  and  were  baptized. 

20.  John  iv.  1.  The  Pharifees  had  heard  that 
Jefus  made  and  baptized  more  difciples  than  John. 

21.  John  x.  40.  Bryond  Jordan,  into  the  place 
where  John  at  firft  baptized. 


Serm.  I."]  of  Baptism.  9 

22.  Acts  i.  5.  John  truly  baptized  with  water. 

23.  Verfe  22.  Beginning  from  the  baptifm  of 
John. 

24.  Acts  x.  $j.  After  the  baptifm  which  John 
preached. 

25.  /lets  xi.  16.  John  indeed  baptized  with  water. 

26.  ^/j  xiii.  24.  When  John  had  firfi  preached, 
before  his  coming,  the  baptifm  of  repentance  to  all 
the  people. 

27.  Acts  xviii.  25.  He  ( Apollos)  fpake  and  taught 
diligently  the  things  of  the  Lord,  knowing  only  the 
baptifm  of  John. 

28.  Ads  xix.  3,  4.  Unto  what  then  were  ye  bap- 
tized ?  And  they  faid,  Unto  John's  baptifm.  Then 
faid  Paul,  John  verily  baptized  with  the  baptifm  of 
repentance,  faying  unto  the  people,  that  they  fhould 
believe  on  him  which  fhould  come  after  him,  that 
is,  on  Chrifr.  Jefus. 

We  will  next  turn  our  attention  to  thofe  text 
which  mention  Chrift's  baptifm. 

1.  Matth.  xxviii.  19.  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach 
all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghoft. 

2.  Mark  xvi.  15,  16.  And  he  faid  unto  them, 
Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and  preach  the  gofpel  to 
every  creature  ;  he  that  believeth  and  is  baptized, 
(hall  be  faved. 

3.  John  iii.  5.  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water, 
and  of  the  Spirit,  &c. 

4.  Verfe  22.  After  thefe  things  came  Jefus  and 
his  difciples  into  the  land  of  Judea,  and  there  tarried 
with  them  and  baptized. 

5.  Verfe  26.  Behold  the  fame  baptizeth,  and  all 
men  come  to  him. 

6.  John  iv.  1,2.  When  therefore  the  Lord  knew 
how  the  Pharifees  had  heard,  that  Jefus  made  and 


io  The  Mode  and  Subjects         [Serm.  I. 

baptized  more  difciples  than  John(though  Jefus  him- 
felf  baptized  not,  but  his  difciples.) 

7.  Acts  ii.  38.  Then  Peter  raid  unto  them,  Re- 
pent, and  be  baptized  every  one  of  you  in  the  name 
of  Jefus  Chrift  for  the  remiffion  of  fins,  and  ye  fhall 
receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghoft. 

8.  Vcrfc  41.  Then  they  that  gladly  received  his 
word  were  baptized. 

9.  Acts  viii.  12,  13.  But  when  they  believed 
Philip  preaching  the  things  concerning  the  kingdom 
of  God,  and  the  name  of  Jefus  Chrift,  they  were 
baptized,  both  men  and  women.  Then  Simon  him- 
felf  believed  alfo  :  and  when  he  was  baptized,  &c. 

1  o.  Acts  viii.  16.  Only  they  were  baptized  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  Jefus. 

1 1.  Verfes  36,  37,  38,  39.  And  as  they  went  on 
their  way,  they  came  unto  a  certain  water,  and  the 
eunuch  faid,-  See,  here  is  water,  what  dorh  hinder 
me  to  be  baptized  ?  And  Philip  faid,  If  thou  be- 
lieved with  all  thine  heart,  thou  mayefl.  And  he 
faid,  I  believe  that  Jefus  Chrift  is  the  Son  of  God. 
And  he  commanded  the  chariot  to  (land  fliil.  And 
they  went  down  both  into  the  water,  both  Philip  and 
the  eunuch,  and  he  baptized  him.  And  when  they 
were  come  up  out  of  the  water,  &c. 

12.  Acts  ix.  18L  And  he  (Saul)  arofe,  and  was 
baptized. 

13.  Acts  x.  47,  48.  Can  any  man  forbid  water, 
that  thefe  fhould  not  be  baptized,  which  have  receiv- 
ed the  Holy  Ghoft  as  well  as  we  ?  and  he  comman- 
ded them  to  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord. 

•     14.   Acts  xvi.  15.  And  when  fhe  (Lydiaj   was 
baptized  and  her  houfhold. 

15.  Verfe  ^y  ^nd  was  baptized,  he  (the  jailor) 
and  all  his,  ftraiohtwav. 

16.  Acts  xviii.  8.  And  many  of  the  Corinthians, 
hearing,  believed  and  were  baptized. 


Serm.  I.]  of  Baptism.  1 1 

17.  Jets  xix.  5.  When  they  heard  this,  they 
were  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jefus. 

18.  Acts  xxii.  19.  And  now,  why  tarried  thou  ? 
arife  and  be  baptized,  and  wafh  away  thy  fins,  call- 
ing on  the  name  of  the  Lord. 

19.  Rom.  vi.  3,  4.  Know  ye  not,  that  fo  many  of 
us  as  were  baptized  into  Chrifl  Jefus,  were  baptized 
into  his  death  ?  Therefore  we  are  buried  with  him 
by  bapiifm  into  death,  that,  like  as  Chrifl  was  raifed 
up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the  Father,  even 
fo  we  alfo  fhould  walk  in  newnefs  of  life. 

20.  1  Cor.  i.  13,  14,  15,  16,  17.  Were  ye  bap- 
tized in  the  name  of  Paul  ?  I  thank  God  that  I  bap- 
tized none  of  you  but  Crifpus  and  Gains  ;  leu  any 
fliould  fay  that  I  had  baptized  in  mine  own  name. 
And  I  baptized  alfo  the  houfiiold  of  Stephanas  : 
Befides,  I  know  not  whether  I  baptized  any  other  ; 
for  Chrift  fent  me  not  to  baptize,  but  to  preach  the 
gofpel. 

21.  1  Cor.  vi.  11.  But  ye  are  warned. 

22.  1  Cor.  12,  13.  For  by  one  Spirit  are  we  all 
baptized  into  one  body*. 

23.  1  Cor.  xv.  29.  Elfe  what  (hall  they  do  that 
are  baptized  for  the  dead  ? 

24.  Gal.  iii.  27.  For  as  many  of  you  as  have  been 
baptized  into  Chrifl:,  have  put  on  Chrifl. 

25.  Eph.'iv.  5.   One  baptifm. 

26.  Eph.  v.  26.  That  he  might  fanfHfy  and 
cleanfe  it  with  the  warning  of  water  by  the  word. 

27.  Col.  ii.  12.  Buried  wirh  him  in  baptifm, 
wherein  alfo  ye  are  rifen  with  him. 

28.  Titus  iii.  5.  According  to  his  mercy  he  faved 
us,  by  the  wafhing  of  regeneration,  and  renewing 
of  the  Holy  Ghoft. 

*  This  intends,  as  fome  fuppofe,  the  baptifm  of  the  Holy 
Ghoft. 


12  The  Mode  and  Subjects  [Serm.L 

29.  Heb.vi.  2.  The  do&rine  of  baptifms*. 

30.  Heb,  x.  22.  Oar  bodies  wafhed  with  pure 
water. 

31.  1  Peter  in.  21.  The  like  figure  whereunto 
even  baptifm  doth  nowfave  us  (not  the  putting  away 
the  filth  of  the  flefh,  but  the  anfwer  of  a  good  con- 
fcience  towards  God,  by  the  refurrection  of  Jefus 
Chrifl:.) 

Thefe,  I  believe,  are  all  the  texts  in  the  New  Tef- 
tament  which  have  a  plain  and  obvious  reference  to 
either  the  baptifm  of  John,  or  of  Chrifl:.  They  af- 
ford us  the  fam  of  all  the  knowledge  which  we  can 
have  of  either  the  mode  or  fubje&s  of  chriftian  bap- 
tifm. What  thefe  pafTages  fay,  we  may  believe  : 
what  they  do  not  countenance,  we  may  not  believe. 
I  will  now  fet  before  you  thofe  paflages  where  wafli- 
ino  is  mentioned,  and  the  Greek  words  which  are  ufed. 

1.  Maith.  vi.  17.  But  thou,  when  thou  faftefl, 
anoint  thy  head,  and  (VvLa/,  nipsa'i)  wafh  thy  face. 

2.  Matth.  xv.  2.  Why  do  thy  difciples  tranfgrefs 
the  tradition  of  the  elders  ?  for  they  (viirrwrcLr,  nip- 
tontai)  warn  not  their  hands  when  they  eat  bread. 

3.  Matth.  xxvii.  24.  When  Pilate  faw  that  he 
could  prevail  nothing,  but  that  rather  a  tumult  was 
made,  he  took  water  and  (aW/^a™,  apenipsato) 
wafhed  his  hands. 

4.  Mark  vii.  2.  And  when  they  faw  fome  of  his 
difciples  eat  bread  with  defiled,  that  is  to  fay  with 
(aV/Vro/c,  aniptois)  unwafhen  hands. 

5.  Verfe  3.  For  the  Pharifees,  and  all  the  Jews, 
except  they  (vi^otlau,  nipsonta'i)  wafh  their  hands  oft, 
they  eat  not,  &c. 

6.  Verfe  4.  When  they  come  from  the  market, 
except  they  (ficLTrrhuAai,  baptisd?i!ai)  wafh,  they  eat 

*  It  is  not  certain  that  this  hath  any  reference  to  chriftian  bap- 
tifm. If  it  have,  it  mud  refer  not  to  that  only.  See  Doddridge  in  lot. 


Serfn.  L]  vf  Baptism.  t% 

not ;  and  many  other  things  there  be  which  they 
have  received  to  hold,  as  the  (fia^ia^^  baptismous)^ 
Wafhing  of  cups  and  pots,  brazen  veffels,  and  of 
tables. 

7.  Verfe  5.  But  eat  bread  with  (a\/VW,  anlpiois) 
unwafhen  hands. 

8.  Verfe  8.  For,  laying  afide  the  commandments 
•of  God,  ye  hold  the  tradition  of  men,  as  the  (£a:r- 
r//(r^«c,  baptismous)  wafhing  of  pots  and  cups. 

9.  Luke  v.  2.  And  they  (atfefo&W,  apephinaii) 
were  wafhing  their  nets. 

10.  Luke  vii.  38.  And  flood  at  his  feet,  behind 
him,  weeping,  and  began  (P>$ixuy)  brechchi)  to  wafh 
his  feet. 

1 1 .  Verfe  44.  And  he  turned  to  the  woman,  and 
faid  unto  Simon,  Seed  thou  this  woman  ?  I  entered 
into  thine  houfe,  thou  gavefl  me  no  water  for  my 
feet :  but  £he  (e£j>*^,  ebrexe)  hath  wafhed  my  feet 
with  tears. 

12.  Luke  xi.  38.  And  when  the  Pharifees  faw  it, 
that  he  had  not  firft  (eoaTr/V^,  ebapiisihe)  wafhed 
before  dinner. 

13.  John  ix.  7.  And  faid  unto  him,  Go,  and 
(Via/,  nipsai)  wafh  in  the  pool  of  Siloam  ;  he  went 
liis  way  therefore  and  {tvilxlo,  enipsato)  wafhed. 

14.  Verfe  j  5.  Then  again  the  Pharifees  alfo  aiked 
him  how  he  had  received  his  fight  :  he  faid  unto 
them,  He  put  clay  upon  mine  eyes,  and  I  Q.nlAp\^ 
mips  amen)  wafhed  and  do  fee. 

15.  John  xiii.  5.  After  that  he  poured  water  into 
a  bafon,  and  began  ()Mc,y,  niptein)  to  wafh  the  dif- 
ciples'  feet. 

16.  Verfe  6.  And  Peter  faid  unto  him,  Lord, 
doft  thou  (>Muc,  nipteis)  wafh  my  feet  ? 

17.  Verfe  8.  Peter  faith  unto  him,  Thou  flialt 
never  (tff  *,  nipsesj  wafh  my  feet.     Jefus  anfwercd 

c 


14  The  Mode  and  Subjects         [Serm.  I. 

him,  If  I  (irfo,  nipso)  wafh  thee  not,  thou  haft  no 
part  with  me. 

18.  Verfe  to.  Jefns  faith  to  him,  He  that  is 
('OfcfeAVyuewfj  oleloumems)  warned,  needeth  not  fave 
(i/\Lao-9:n,  nipsasthai)  to  wafh  his  feet,  &c. 

19.  Verfe  14.  If  I  then,  your  Lord  and  mafter, 
have  (pv$ct,  enipsci)  wafhed  your  feet,  ye  alfo  ought 
(u't/Jhv,  nipteiri)  to  wafh  one  another's  feet. 

20.  Acts  ix.  37.  And  it  came  to  pafs  in  thofe 
days,  that  fhe  was  fick  and  died,  whom  when  they 
had  (hivou/lie,  lousantes)  warned. 

21.  Acts  xvi.  ^t>.  And  he  took  them,  the  fame 
hour  of  the  night,  and  Q.K*<nvt  elouseii)  wafhed  their 
(tripes. 

22.  Acts  xxii.  16.  And  now,  why  tarried  thou  ? 
arife  and  be  baptized,  and  (aVoxy'o-oa,  apolousai)  wafh 
away  thy  fins. 

23.  1  Cor.  vi.  11.  But  fuch  were  fome  of  you, 
but  ye  (aW.K<ra<r0fc,  apelousasthc)  are  wafhed. 

24.  Eph.  v.  26.  That  he  might  fanctify  and  cleanfe 
it  with  (^£,  louiro)  the  warning  of  water  by  the 
word. 

25.  1  Tim.  v.  10.  If  flie  (ln\iv^  enipsen)  have 
wafhed  the  faints'  feet. 

26.  Titus  iii.  5.  By  the  (>*V?  loutrou)  wafhing 
of  regeneration. 

27.  Heb.  ix.  10.  Which  ftood  only  in  meats  and 
drinks,  and  (lioc<pbfoi<;  pxx.7r1i7y.o7e,  diaphorois  baptismois) 
divers  wafliings. 

28.  Heb.  x.  22.  Having  our  bodies  (Kix\iy.ivoiy 
lehumcnoi)  warned  with  pure  water. 

29.  2  Peter  \\.  22.  But  it  is  happened  unto  them 
according  to  the  true  proverb — and  the  fow  that 
(\wao(aeV>7,  lousamene)  was  wafhed,  &c. 

30.  Rev.  i.  5.  Unto  him  that  loved  us  and  (kwolAi, 
lousanti)  wafhed  us  from  our  fins  in  his  own  blood. 


Serm.  I.]  of  Baptism,  15 

31.  Rev.  vii.  14.  Thefe  are  they  who  came  out 
of  great  tribulation,  and  (eVxumK,  eplunan)  have 
warned  their  robes  id  the  blood  of  the  Lamb*. 

Thofe  paiTages  which  make  mention  cf  sprinklings 
with  the  Greek  words  ufed,  now  call  for  your  at- 
tention. 

1.  Heb.'ix.  13.  For  if  the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats 
and  the  afhes  of  an  heifer  Qolvti?^?*,  ranti%ousa) 
fprinkling  the  unclean,  &c. 

2.  Verfe  19.  He  (Mofes)  took  the  blood  of  calves 
and  of  goats,  with  water,  and  fcarlet  wool  and  hyifop, 
and  (kpp<i/li<n9  erranlise)  fprinkled  both  the  book  and 
all  the  people. 

3.  Hcb.  x.  22.  Having  our  hearts  (i^laA^yAvot^ 
errantismenoi)  fprinkled  from  an  evil  conscience* 

4.  Heb.  xi.  28.  Through  faith  he  kept  the  paiT- 
over  and  the  (arfb<rxy<riy9  proschusin)  fprinkling  of 
blood. 

5.  Heb.  xii.  24.  And  to  the  blood  of  (/atf/o-^Sf, 
rantismoii)  fprinkling. 

6.  1  Peter  i.  2.  And  to  the  Qa/lufilv,  rantismori) 
fprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Jefus  Chrift. 

Lqftly.  You  will  nowgive  attention,  for  a  moment, 
to  thofe  paiTages  of  fcriptu re  where  the  word  dip  is 
mentioned. 

1.  Luke  xvi.  24.  That  he  may  (/2a\|^,  bapse)  dip 
his  finger  in  water. 

2.  Matth.  xxvi.  23.  And  he  anfwered  and  faid, 
He  that  (e/x^a'|a?,  embapsas)  dippeth  his  hand  with 
me  in  the  dim. 

3.  Mark  xiv.  20.  And  he  anfwered  and  faid  unto 
them,  It  is  one  of  the  twelve,  that  (kpGairlbfjitw,  em- 
baptomenos)  dippeth  with  me  in  the  diih. 

*  Pluno  properly  fignifies  to  waih  clothes ;  as  hud  the  body  j 
and  nlptd  the  face  and  hands. 


1 6  The  Mode  and  Subjects  [Serm.  1, 

4.  John  xiii.  26.  And  he  anfwered,  He  it  is  to 
whom  I  f-hall  give  a  fop  when  I  have  (jSa'^ac,  bapsai) 
dipped  it;  and  when  he  had  Q/u€gl^ol;,  embapsas) 
dipped  the  fop,  &c. 

5.  Rev.  xix.  13.  And  he  was  clothed  with  a  vef- 
ture  (£>i.&ay.fAivov,  bebammenoii)  dipped  in  blood. 

A  few  remarks  on  what  we  have  pafled  over  will 
clofe  the  prefent  difcourfc. 

1 .  We  fee  that  all  the  words,  which  appertain  to 
the  ordinance  of  baptifm,  iignify  the  fame  which  they 
would  provided  immerfion  were  the  fcripture  mode. 

2.  We  fee  that  the  fubjeel:  of  baptifm  is  very  re- 
peatedly mentioned  in  the  New  Teftament.  It  is 
brought  to  view  exprefsly  in  about  threefcore  paf- 
fages. 

3.  Whenever  baptifm  is  mentioned,  and  neither 
the  word  fa-rllla  (baptizo)  nor  /Sa^rr/a-^  (baptismos) 
is  ufed,  the  word  fubftituted  plainly  intimates  that 
bathing,  cr  warning  the  body  aii  over,  is  the  mode; 
for  this  is  the  fignification  of  wo  (loud),  which  is 
the  word,  and  the  only  word,  which  the  fcriptures 
employ  in  the  room  of  jSa^/^w,  (baptizo.) 

4.  Whenever  #*?rfe£w,  (baptizo)  or  ^a^-r/a-^of  (bap- 
tismos) is  tran dated  wafhing,  a  ceremonial  and  not  a 
common  wafhing  is  manifeftly  intended. 

<  5.  We  find  that  in  all  the  places  where  fprinkling 
is  mentioned,  the  original  words,  jxxvt/^co  (rantizl) 
and  vrfixrxvw  (proschusin)  are  very  different  from 
$0L7rA\iZu  {baptizo)  and  /Jocttw/uoc  {baptismos.') 

6.  You  will  oleafe  to  obferve,  that  wherever  we 
find,  through  the  New  Teftament,  the  word,  to  dip, 
it  is  from  the  fame  theme  whence  $a.-x\i\u  {baptizo) 
comes. 

7.  We  fee  that  every  thing  looks  as  though  im- 
mersion might  be  the  mode  ;  and,  as  for  sprinklings 
there  is,  to  fay  the  lead,  nothing  which  looks  like  it. 


Serm.  II.]  of  Baptism.  \y 


SERMON  II. 


MATTHEW  XXVIII.  19,  20. 

Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghoft  ; 
teaching  them  to  obferve  all  things  whatfoevef  I  have  com- 
manded you  :  And,  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world.     Amen. 

iHE  bufinefs  which  We  are  now  upon 
depends  very  much  upon  the  definitions  of  certain 
words,  and  principally  upon  the  definition  of  the 
Word  baptize,  and  upon  the  certain  evidence  of  fuch 
definition,  or  definitions,  being  accurate  and  juft.  For 
we  can  no  otherwife  underftand  what  God  the  Lord 
faith  unto  us,  than  by  knowing  the  import  of  the 
words  by  which  he  is  pleafed  to  communicate  his 
will.  The  Great  Teacher,  who  came  from  God, 
hath  doubtlefs  communicated  his  mind  fo  explicitly 
that  the  humble  in  heart  may  know  the  common 
matters  which  relate  to  faith  and  practice.  If  we 
devoutly  fearch  the  fcriptures,  and  feek  wifdom  as 
filver,  and  fearch  for  her  as  for  hid  treafures,  God  will 
make  us  to  underftand  knowledge,  and  to  ferve  him 
v/ith  acceptable  practice.  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
hath,  mod  certainly,  chofen  acceptable  words,  words 
of  definite  meaning.  We  are  to  fearch  out  their 
fignification,  and  to  be  obedient.  I  cannot  judge  of 
their  fignification  for  you,  nor  can  I  anfwer  for  the 
judgment  which  you  (hall  make  tip,  nor  can  you  for 
me. 

I  am,  by  my  office,  obliged  to  exhibit,  fo  far  as  I 
can,  all  thofe  diviue  truths  which  relate  to  faith  and 

c  2 


i  %  The  Mode  and  Subjects         [Serm.  II. 

practice.  I  am  obliged  to  believe  and  practice  ac- 
cording to  the  bell  light  which  I  can  gather,  or  have 
in  any  way  afforded  me.  You  are  under  firaiiar 
obligations. 

Whilft  we  proceed,  I  wifh  you  to  believe,  fully, 
two  things  ;  one  is,  that  truth,  if  believed  and  prac- 
ticed, will  not,  on  the  whole,  harm  you.  The  other 
is,  that  the  mod  fure  way  to  acquire  truth  is,  to  be 
of  a  humble  and  obedient  mind,  ready  to  receive  the 
truth.  For  God  refifteth  the  proud,  but  giveth 
prace  to  the  humble. 

o 

In  the  preceding  difcourfe,  wre  attended  to  the  de- 
finition of  certain  words  which  appertain  to  the  ordi- 
nance of  baptifm  ;  and  then  collected  the  fcripture 
account  of  baptifm,  together  with  forae  other  texts, 
which  are  fuppofed  to  throw  light  upon  the  fubject 
under  confideration.     In  this  difcourfe  we  are — 

in.  To  produce  the  more  direct  evidence,  that  my 
definitions  of  baptifm,  and  to  baptize,  are  accurate 
and  juft. 

The  definition,  which  I  gave  of  baptifm,  w7as,  a 
washing,  a  sacred,  a  ceremonial  wafliing.  I  will 
now  add  to  this  definition,  that  it  is  immeriion,  or 
dipping  one  all  over  in  water. 

The  definition  which  I  gave  of  the  word  baptizb 
is,  to  dip  all  over,  to  waih.  I  will  alfo  add,  that  the 
word  fignifies,  to  wafti  the  body,  or  any  thing,  all 
over.  What  I  mean  is,  that  thefe  are  the  fignifica- 
tions  of  the  words  baptisma  and  baptizb,  which  are 
rendered  baptifm  and  to  baptize. 

I  am  now  to  produce  evidence,  that  this  is  a  juft 
and  accurate  definition  of  the  words. 

You  will  obferve,  that  this  is  quite  different  from 
the  subjects  of  baptifm ;  that  is  another  fubjecl-,  which 
mud  be  attended  to  in  its  place. 

The  evidence  which  I  have  to  offer,  in  order  to 
fix  precifely  the  juft  fenfe  and  meaning  of  the  words 


Serm.  II.]  of  Baptism.  19 

baptism  and  to  baptize,  is  contained  in  the  following 
facts.     The 

1  ft  Comprifes  what  the  Greek  Lexicon,  Concor- 
dance, and  two  Englifh  Dictionaries,  teftify  of  the 
words. 

Schrevelius's  Lexicon  teftifles,  the  import  of  bap- 
tism is  lotto,  wafhing.  Alfo  that  to  baptize  fignifies 
to  wash,  to  put  under  water,  or  under  any  other 
liquid  thing  ;  to  fink,  dip  in,  duck  or  plunge  over 
head,  to  immerfe. 

Butterworth's  Concordance  fays,  baptifm  is  an 
ordinance  of  the  New  Teftament,  inftituted  by  Jefus 
Chrift,  whereby  a  profeiTed  believer  in  Chrift,  is  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghoft,  immerfed  in  and  covered  with  water, 
and  then  raifed  up  out  of  it,  as  a  fign  of  his  fellow- 
fhip  with  Chrift  in  his  death,  burial  and  refurreclion, 
and  a  fign  of  his  own  death  to  fin,  and  refurreclion 
to  newnefs  of  life  here,  and  to  life  eternal  hereafter. 
The  fame  Concordance  defines  the  word  to  baptize, 
thus — to  dip,  immerfe,  or  plunge. 

Entick's  Dictionary  fays,  that—- Baptism  is  a  fa- 
crament  that  admits  into  the  church. — Baptizer,  one 
who  chriftens,  or  dips.—- Baptistery,  the  place  of  bap- 
tizing at,  a  font. — Baptize,  to  chriften,  plunge, over- 
whelm.— Baptized,  admitted  to  baptifm,  dipt,  &c. 

Bailey's  Dictionary,  fpeaking  of  baptifm,  or 
rather  the  place  in  which  perfons  were  baptized,  fays, 
Baptistery  is  either  the  place  or  vefTel,  in  which  per- 
fons are  baptized.  In  ancient  times,  this  being  per- 
formed by  immerfion,  the  perfons  fo  initiated  went 
into  a  river  and  were  plunged  ;  but  in  the  time  of 
Conftantine  the  Great,  chapels,  or  places  on  purpofe 
to  baptize  in,  were  built  in  great  cities,  which  was 
performed  in  the  eaftcrn  and  warmer  countries  by 
dipping  the  perfons  ;  but  in  procefs  of  time,  in  the 


26  The  Mode  and  Subjects  [Serm.  II. 

weftern  and  colder  countries,  fprinkling  was  fubfti- 
tuted  in  place  of  dipping  \  which  was  the  origin  of 
our  fonts  in  churches. 

2.  I  will  repeat  fome  of  the  attendant  or  circum- 
ftantial  facls,  which  have  relation  to  the  ordinance  of 
baptifm,  that  you  may  look  at  them,  and  judge  for 
yourfelves,  whether  the  preceding  definitions  appear 
juft. 

John  baptized  in  the  river  Jordan. 

He  was  baptizing  in  Enon  bccaufe  there  was  much 
water  there. 

The  name  of  the  place,  where  baptifm  was  ad- 
miniftered,  is  baptisterion  or  baptistery^  which  (igni- 
tes a  place  in  which  to  warn  the  body  all  over. 

Baptifm  fignifies  to  dip,  plunge,  immerfe,  or  walh 
the  body  ail  over  in  water. 

Baptizer  fignifies  one  who  dips,  plunges,  or  waflies 
the  body  all  over  in  water. 

To  baptize  fignifies  to  plunge  under  water,  to  dip, 
or  to  wafti  the  body  all  Over. 

To  be  baptized  is  to  be  plunged,  immerfed,  or 
waflied  all  over  in  water. 

Does  this  whole  matter,  taking  fo  many  of  the 
words,  and  fome  circumftances,  and  finding  them  all 
fo  well  agreeing  together,  help  you,  in  any  degree, 
to  the  definition  of  the  word  baptize  ?  Suppofing 
thefe  things  be  fa&s,  and  you  had  never  had  any 
prejudice  for,  or  againft,  the  word  baptize,  would 
you  be  able  to  gather  the  meaning  of  it  from  what 
hath  been  faid  ? 

There  is  an  objection  darting  in  the  minds  of  fome 
of  you,  which  fliould  be  now  obviated,  left  it  preju- 
dice your  minds  from  the  truth. 

The  objection  is,  Do  not  the  words  fignify  fome 
other  things,  as  well  as  thofe  which  have  been  men^ 
tioned  ? 


Scrm.  II.]  of  Baptism.  21 

Ans.l  have  thought  they  did:  but  I  have  fearched 
in  feveral  dictionaries,  and  read  many  authors  upon 
the  words,  yet  have  not  found  one  dictionary  which 
has  given  a  definition  of  the  words  different  from 
what  I  have  given  ;  nor  one  author  who  has  been 
able  to  fhow,  that  the  true  meaning  of  the  words  is 
any  otherwife  than  what  1  have  mentioned.  BeSides, 
the  very  courSe  of  argumentation  which  Dr.  Lathrop, 
Mr.  Cleavsland  and  others  have  taken,  by  which  to 
prove  that  baptizb  hath  forne  other  fignification  than, 
to  dip,  immerfe,  to  bury  or  overwhelm,  is  an  implicit 
confeflion  that  they  were  not  able  to  prove  any  fuch 
thing,  h  is  alfo  a  ftrong  presumptive  argument, 
that  no  different  fignification  can  be  found. 

Their  argument  is  this :  Baptc  Signifies,  in  one  in- 
stance, in  the  Old  Teftament,  to  wet  with  the  dew 
of  heaven.  Baptizo  is  the  offspring  of  baftP*  *^& 
confequently  may  be  taken  in  the  Same  fenfe.  'J  £*S 
argument  is  of  the  fame  weight  with  the  following  f 
My  father  believes  in  Sprinkling,  as  being  baptiSm  ; 
I  am  his  offspring,  and  consequently  I  believe  the 
Same  ;  when  the  fact  is,  I  am  largely  convinced  that 
it  is  no  fuch  thing.  Would  gentlemen  employ  fuch 
an  argument,  did  not  their  caufe  labour  ?  Such  an 
argument,  when  it  (lands,  as  it  does,  at  the  front  of 
all  their  fuppofed  evidence,  is  an  implicit  confeffion 
that  they  cannot  prove  what  they  wifh  to*. 

*  Since  writing  the  above,  I  have  met  with  CoWs  Latin  Dic~ 
tionary,  which  gives  one  Englifh  of  baptizot  to  sprinkle.  It  hath, 
indeed,  been  matter  of  no  little  furprife,  that  all  modern  dictionary 
compilers  have  not  given  one  definition  of  the  word  baptize,  to 
fprinkle  ;  for  it,  indeed,  is  one  fignification,  which  the  practice 
of  many  chriftians,  for  two  or  three  hundred  years  paft,  has  given 
to  the  word. 

Had  all  lexicons,  and  all  dictionaries,  for  the  twolaft  centuries, 
borne  united  teftimony,  that  one  fenfe  of  the  word  baptizo  was 
to  fpriokle,  it  would  not  have  been  half  So  unaccountable  as  it  now 


H2  7  he  Mode  and  Subjects         £Serm.  II. 

This  matter  will  have  farther  attention  in  another 
place. 

3.  The  words  baptismos  and  baptizo  have  two, 
and  only  two  tranflations,  in  the  New  Teftament. 
Thefe  two  are  baptism  and  washing.  They  are  very 
generally  rendered  baptisfn,  or  to  baptize.  This  is 
their  ufual  tranflation.  But  feveral  times  in  Mark, 
Luke,  and  in  the  epiflle  to  the  Hebrews,  they  are 
rendered  washing.  As  the  warning  of  pots,  and 
cups  and  brazen  vefTels  and  tables,  or  feats  on  which 
they  reclined,  when  they  ate  meat  ;  and  diaphorois 
baptisfnois  in  Hebrew  is  rendered,  divers  washings. 

In  the  law  given  by  Mofes,  the  people  were,  on 
many  occafions,  to  bathe  their  bodies,  and  warn,  their 
clothes  in  water  ;  and  alfo  to  put  their  pots  and  cups 
and  brazen  veilels  into  water,  that  they  might  be 
cleanfed  from  ceremonial  uncleannefs.  To  thefp 
legal  ceremonies  the  Pharifees  had  added  traditional 
ones,  which  were,  no  doubt,  obferved  in  the  fame 
manner  as  thofe  appointed  by  the  Lord.  If  fo,  then 
the  warning  of  pots,  he.  in  Mark,  was  putting  them 
into  water,  as  the  command  was  to  do,  Levit.  xi.  32. 
The  divers  warnings  in  Heb.  ix.  10.  were  ceremonial 
warnings,  or  bathings,  in  which  the  body  was  wafli- 
ed,  or  dipped,  Numb.  xix.  19.     This  being  the  cafe, 

is  that  they  have  fo  generally  retained  the  ancient  and  primitive 
lignifications,  and  refufed  to  adopt  the  modern  one,  which  preju- 
dice, convenience  and  modern  practice  have  given  to  it.  Indeed, 
could  a  thoufand  modern  lexicons  and  dictionaries  be  found, 
which  mould  fay,  to  sprinkle  is  one  fenfe  in  which  bapti-zdis  ufed, 
it  would  all  come  to  nothing,  unlefs  they  mould  teiHfy  that  this 
is  one  of  its  ancient  and  primitive  fignifications  :  and  even  then, 
it  would  come  to  no  more  than  this,  that  the  word  is  lefs  deter- 
minate, than  it  is  now  fuppofed  to  be.  Could  they  do  this,  it 
would  be  dill  nothing,  unlefs  they  prove  the  fcriptures  ufe  it  in, 
this  fenfe,  which  they  cannot  do.  But  if  they  could,,  it  would  net 
be  fully  to  their  point,  unlefs  they  can  fnow>  that  it  is  thus  ufed 
in  application  to  the  ordinance. 


Serm.  II.']  of  Baptism.  23 

does  not  this  matter  go  to  confirm,  or   determine, 
what  is  the  definition  of  baptifm  ? 

4.  We  will  now  mention  a  few  noted  witneiTes, 
who  have  given  their  teftimony  as  to  che  meaning 
of  the  word  baptizo. 

Calvin,  a  very  warm  op.pofer  of  the  Baptifts,  fhall, 
as  a  witnefs  in  this  caufe,  fpeak  firff.  His  teftimo- 
ny is,  "  Howbeit,  the  very  word  of  baptizing  figni- 
fieth  to  dip/' 

Zanchius,  as  brought  forward  by  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Butterworth,  fliall  be  my  next  witnefs.  He  favs, 
baptizo  is  to  immerfe,  plunge  under,  to  overwhelm 
in  water. 

1  could  quote,  or  bring  forward,  a  multitude  of 
witneiTes,  and  all  from  our  own  order,  the  Paedo- 
baptifts,  to  prove  the  fame  point.  But  in  the  mouth 
of  two  or  three  witneffes,  if  they  be  good  ones, 
every  word  fhall  be  eftablifhed.  We  will  therefore 
produce  but  one  more ;  that  fhall  be  good  Doctor 
Owen.  "  For  the  original  and  natural  fignification 
of  it,  (baptizo J  it  fignifies  to  dip,  to  plunge*." 

5.  I  will  mention  to  you  a  Greek  word,  which 
Paul  repeatedly  ufes,  as  fignifying  the  fame  thing 
as  baptizo,  and  where  he  means  the  fame  thing, 
nameiy,  baptifm. 

In  1  Cor.  vi.  11,  Paul,  fpeaking  to  the  Corin- 
thians of  divers  kinds  of  vile  tinners,  fays,  f.j  And 
fuch  were  fome  of  you  ;  but  ye  are  washed/9  he. 

Eph,  v.  26.  That  he  might  fanclify  and  cleanfe  it 
[the  church]  with  the  washing  of  water,  by  the 
word. 

Heb.  x.  22.  Let  us  draw  near,  with  a  true  heart, 
in  full  affurance  of  faith,  having  our  hearts  fprinkled 
from  an  evil  confeience,  and  our  bodies  washed  with 
pure  water. 

*  Ancient  Dialogue. 


14  5T^  Mode  and  Subjects  [Serm.  IT. 

The  Psedobaptifts  acknowledge  that  washing,  in 
thefe  text,  means  baptism,  and  I  know  not  that  any 
of  them  deny  it.  Baptifm  and  wafliing  appear  to  be 
ufed  as  fynonymous  words,  or  as  words  fignifying 
the  fame  thing.  If  this  be  the  cafe,  then  the  two 
words,  baptizb  and  hub,  which  are  tranflated,  one  to 
baptize,  and  the  other  to  wafli,  mean  the  fame 
thing,  and  are  thus  intended  by  the  apoftle.  Then, 
provided  we  can  determine  what  hub  means,  we  can 
alfo  determine  what  is  the  fignification  of  baptizb. 
This  word,  hub,  fignifies  to  wafli,  and  to  bathe  the 
body  in  water,  for  thus  it  is  generally,  if  not  uni- 
verfally  ufed,  and  from  it  is  hutron,  a  bath,  or  place 
to  wafli  the  body  in.  Befides,  the  word  hub  is  never 
ufed  in  the  New  Teflament,  nor  any  where  elfe,  to 
my  knowledge,  to  fignify  either  fprinkling  or  com- 
mon warning.  Its  appropriate  fenfe  appears  to  be, 
bathing  or  wafliing  any  thing  all  over  ;  as  you  may 
fee,  Acts  ix.  37,  and  xvi.  ^  >  2  Peter  ii.  22  ;  which 
are  the  only  places  where  I  recollect  the  word  lotto 
is  ufed,  fave  where  the  ordinance  of  baptifm  appears 
to  be  referred  to.  This  being  the  cafe,  the  matter 
appears  jufl  as  it  would,  provided  the  ordinance  in- 
cluded the  bathing  of  the  body  in  water.  This  is 
letting  fcripture  interpret  itfelf :  and  the  interpre- 
tation which  it  gives  is,  baptifm  is  bathing,  or  wafli- 
ing the  body  in  water.  This,  therefore,  may  help 
you  a  little  towards  determining  in  your  minds  what 
is  the  fignification  of  baptizb.  For  hub  is  repeatedly 
ufed  in  fcripture,  as  importing  the  fame  mode  of 
wafliing  which  is  commanded  in  the  ordinance  of 
baptifm. 

6.  Paul's  defcription  of  the  mode  of  baptizing,  or 
of  what  is  done  to  thofe  who  are  baptized,  may 
afford  you  farther  light  upon  the  fubject. 


Serm.  II.]  of  Baptism.  25 

Paul  brings  this  matter  up  to  the  Roman  and  Co- 
loflian  chriftians,  as  a  matter  well  known  to  them* 
To  the  former  he  fays,  Rom.  vi.  4.  Therefore  we 
are  buried  with  him  by  baptifm  into  death,  that  like 
as  Chrift  was  raifed  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of 
the  Father,  even  fo  we  alfo  fhould  walk  in  newnefs 
of  life.  To  the  other  he  fays,  Col.  ii.  12.  Buried 
with  him  in  baptifm,  wherein  alfo  ye  arc  rifen  with 
him,  through  the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God,  who 
hath  raifed  him  from  the  dead. 

Upon  thefe  texts,  Dr.  Doddridge  has  the  follow- 
ing note  :  "  It  teems  the  part  of  candor  to  confefs, 
that  here  is  an  allufion  to  baptifm  by  immerfion,  as 
was  mod  ufual  in  thefe  early  times."  Here  the  good 
Doctor  fays,  "  as  was  most  usual:99  this  I  lhall,  by 
and  by,  explain  to  you. 

In  the  mean  time,  you  will  pleafe  to  pay  due  at- 
tention to  what  was  done  to  thofe  who  were  baptized, 
and  which  appears  to  be  familiar  to  the  Roman  and 
ColofTian  chriftians.  The  apoftle  makes  no  remarks, 
and  explains  nothing  to  them,  but  fpeaks  to  them  as 
though  they  would  and  did  well  underftand  what  he 
meant,  when  he  faid,  "  We  are  buried  with  him 
by  baptifm  into  death;"  and,  "Buried  with  him 
in  baptifm."  It  is  plain  fact,  that  Paul  thus  fpeaks, 
and  it  alfo  appears  very  plainly,  that  he  had  no 
apprehenfion  but  that  he  (liould  be  underflood. 

Biftiop  Hoadly's  declaration  appears  to  be  much 
in  point :  i  If  baptifm,'  fays  he,  c  had  been  then/ 
/'.  e.  in  the  apoftles*  days,  '  performed  as  it  is  now 
among  us,  we  ihould  never  have  fo  much  as  heard  of 
this  form  of  expreffion,  of  dying  and  rifing  again  in 
this  rile*.' 

Thefe  things  I  have  thought  it  my  duty  to  lay 
before  you,  that  I  might  affift  you,  by  a  number  of 

*  Ten  Letters. 
D 


20  The  Mode  and  Subjects         [Serm.  II. 

plain  facts,  to  form  a  judgment,  each  one  for  himfelf, 
what  the  meaning  of  baptifm  is,  and  what  the  word 
to  baptize  fig ni lies. 

1  have  (till  more  light  upon  this  fubject,  and  (hall, 
in  the  next  difcourfe,  lay  it  within  your  view.  It 
will  perhaps  be,  to  fome  of  you,  more  convincing 
than  any  thing  which  I  have  as  yet  exhibited.  But 
previoufly  I  will  make  one  obfervation,  and  it  is  this  : 
all  the  evidence  which  we  have  been  exhibiting,  we 
have  on  one  fide  of  the  queftion  ;  and,  if  I  miftake 
nor,  none  on  the  other  to  counteract  it :  for,  if  my 
memory  and  judgment  be  correct,  the  wifefl  and  beft 
of  men,  of  our  own  denomination,  have  aflertcd, 
thaf  thefe  things  are  fo.  I  do  not  fay  that  all  good 
men  have  ;  but  the  mod  learned  have,  and  fome  who 
have  appeared  very  pious. 

But  you  will  fay,  Why  have  they  not  practiced 
differently,  if  they  have  thus  believed  ?  I  am  not 
anfwerable  for  their  practice  ;  bur,  if  the  Lord  will, 
I  ihall,  ere  long,  give  you  the  reafons  which  they 
affign. 

I  (hall  only  add,  for  the  prefent,  two  or  three 
confequences,  and  then  leave  the  fubject  for  your 
conlideration. 

1.  The  Baptifts  have,  again  it  our  practice,  and 
for  theirs,  that  kind  of  evidence  which  is,  perhaps, 
in  all  cafes  but  the  prefent,  confidered  the  moil  une- 
quivocal and  certain.  This  evidence  is  given  in  by 
a  cloud  of  witnefles,  who,  whilft  they  are  bearing 
their  teftimony,  condemn  themfelves  every  fentence 
they  utter.  If  thefe  men,  who  are  confeffed  by  both 
i\  jes  to  be  both  pious  and  learned,  may  be  believed, 
the  caufe  will  molt  certainly  be  determined  againft 
us :  for  there  was  never  a  clearer  cafe.  They  unitedly 
teitify  that  the  fcripture  mode  of  baptifm  is  immer- 
fioa,  but  omit  the  practice.  In  this  they  condemn 
themfelves. 


Serm.  III.]  of  Baptism.  ij 

2.  The  fcripture  fenfe,  and,  for  aught  appears, 
the  only  fenfe,  of  baptifm,  is,  dipping,  immerfion, 
burying  in  water,  being  overwhelmed,  and  the  like. 

3.  We  are  brought  to  this  dilemma,  either  to  com- 
mence Baptifts,  as  to  the  mode,  or  do  as  our  fathers 
have  done,  confers  the  truth  in  theory,  and  neglect 
it  in  practice. 


SERMON  III. 


MATTHEW  XXVIII.  19,  20. 

Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghofi  ; 
teaching  them  to  obferve  all  things  whatfoever  I  have  com- 
manded you  :  And,  lo,  I  am  with  you  aiway,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world.     Amen. 

JVlEN,  brethren,  and  fathers,  we  are  ft  ill  upon 
a  very  important  fubjecl — a  fubjecT:  which  highly 
concerns  us  as  cbriftian? — a  fubjccl  in  which  our  feel- 
ings, our  reputation,  and  our  peace  too,  may  not  be 
a  little  concerned.  Many  things,  not  to  fay  every 
thing,  call  upon  us  not  to  go  too  fad  ;  and,  at  the 
fame  time,  obedience  to  our  common  Lord  forbids 
all  backwardnefs,  in  purfuing  where  his  truth  and 
Spirit  lead  us. 

All  which  I  requeft  of  you  is,  with  candor  hear, 
with  readinefs  obey,  what  truth  (hall  dictate. 

Should  we,  after  long  and  ferious- deliberation,  be 
obliged  to  believe  and  practice  differently  from  what 
we  have  heretofore  done,  we  (hall  be  much  expofed 
to  two  things :  one  is,  to  be  reviled  ;  the  other,  to 
revile  again.  What  we  (hall  need  is,  patience  to  bear 
the  one,  and  grace  that  we  may  avoid  the  other. 


2S  The  Mode  and  Subjects         [Scrm.  Ill; 

Perhaps  human  nature  is  more  inclined  to  nothing 
than  to  an  overbearing  fpirit.  It  is  perfectly  confo- 
nant  with  human  nature  to  make  ourfelves,  and  not 
the  fcriptures,  the  ftandard  of  both  faith  and  prac- 
tice. The  natural  confequence  of  this  is  cenfure 
againft  all  who  dare  to  think,  or  act,  as  we  do  not. 
To  guard  you  againfl  unreafonable  and  common  pre- 
judice, 1  will,  foryourconfideration,  fuggeft  a  thought, 
which  we  may  do  well  to  remember  ;  and  it  is  this  : 
many,  who  fliall  believe  and  practice  as  we  have  long 
done,  may  be  as  honed  and  faithful  as  we  then  were. 
This  being  true,  the  following  confequence  is  plain, 
that  the  line  of  conduct  which  the  Baptifls  ought  to 
have  practiced,  in  months  and  years  pad,  towards 
us,  the  fame,  if  we  be  Baptifls,  will  it  become  us  to 
purfue  with  relation  to  others.  It  requires  not  much 
forefight  to  difcover,  that  we  {hall  need  much  of  that 
wifdom  which  is  profitable  to  direct. 

Whilft  it  may  be  indifpenfable  with  us  to  ufe  every 
prudent  mean  to  diffufe  that  light  which  God  may 
gracioufiy  afford  us,  it  will  be  our  wifdom  to  do 
every,  thing  in  fuch  a  manner  as  not  to  heighten,  but, 
if  poffible,  to  lower,  the  prejudices  of  good  people. 

Whilit  you,  my  dear  friends  and  people,  know  that 
light  chafe th  away  the  darknefs,  and  that  truth  will 
ultimately  prevail  againfl  every  error  ;  I  folicit  your 
candor  and  prayerful  attention,  that  error  may  not 
be  retained,  or  prevail  againfl  any  of  us,  to  our 
wounding. 

Our  attention  hath  already  been  called  to  the 
definition  of  a  number  of  words,  which  relate  to  the 
ordinance  of  baptifm,  to  the  fcripture  account  of 
baptifm,  together  with  fome  other  texts,  which  were 
fuppofed  to  throw  light/upon  the  fubject,  and  alfo  to 
fome  evidence  in  fupport  of  the  given  definitions. 
As  the  great  cmeftion  turns  upon  what  is  commanded, 


Serm.  III.]  of  Baptism.  29 

and  as  that  cannot  be  otherwife  known  than  by 
making  fure  the  import  of  the  words  ufed,  we  (halt 
therefore  fearch  for  additional  light  and  certainty, 
by  inquiring — 

iv.  How  the  apoflles  and  primitive  chriftians- 
underftood  this  matter,  and  how  they  practiced. 

If  this  can  be  made  plain,  then,  perhaps,  your 
mind  will  be  fatisfied,  and  your  judgments  made  up, 

I  proceed  to  lay  the  evidence  before  you. 

There  appears  no  neceffity  of  fpending  time  to 
produce  evidence  that  the  apoftles  underftood  the 
matter  to  be  as  I  have  proved  to  you  that  it  was  : 
For  they,  no  doubt,  underftood  the  words  which 
Chrift  (pake,  and  the  commands  which  he  gave  ;  be- 
fides,  if  the  apoflles  and  primitive  church  practiced 
thus,  it  is  evident  that  they  thus  underftood  it ;  for 
douhtlefs  they,  especially  the  apoftles,  were  honed 
men,  and  practiced  as  they  underftood  Jefus  Chrift 
to  have  directed  them. 

I  will  here  make  two  obfervations  to  you  \  and  I 
wifh  you  to  remember  them. 

The  firft  is,  no  perfon  fhould,  efpecially  in  impor- 
tant matters,  make  up  his  judgment,  that  any  parti- 
cular fubject  is  true,  till  he  has  evidence  of  its  truth. 

1  he  other  is,  the  beft  proof  which  the  nature  of 
any  cafe  admits  of,  may  and  ought  to  be  cenfidered 
as  evidence,  and  fo  received  by  us,  as  to  thofe  things 
we  are  called  to  believe  and  practice, 

There  are  different  degrees  of  evidence  :  the 
higheft  kind  produces  knowledge.  When  the  evi- 
dence is  fmall,  it  produces  a  weak  and  dubiou?  belief. 
But  where  it  is  fuch  that,  on  fuppofition  the  thing- 
be  true,  the  evidence  could  not  be  greater  than  it  is, 
there  we  are  obliged  to  yield  cur  affent,  and  we  do 
violence  to  our  reafon  if  we  will  not  believe. 

d  2 


2>o  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Serm.  Ill; 

The  evidence,  which  we  have  with  refpeel  to  the 
praclice  of  the  apoftles  in  the  matter  of  baptizing, 
differs  in  degree,  and,  in  fome  meafure,  in  kind, 
from  the  evidence  which  we  have  refpecling  the 
praclice  of  the  church  in  later  ages  as  to  the  fame 
matter.  But  if  we  have,  with  refpeel  to  the  prac- 
lice of  both,  the  beft  evidence  which  the  different 
cafes  admit  of,  we  are  under  obligation  to  believe 
the  evidence  good,  and  the  facts  true  which  are 
fupported  by  it. 

We  have  much  the  fame  kind  of  evidence  with 
refpeel  to  the  praclice  of  the  apoflles,  which  we  have 
as  to  the  practice  of  the  church  for  many  ages  after 
them.  Mr.  Baxter,  Bifhop  Hoadly,  and  others, 
teftify,  that  the  apoftolic  praclice  was,  immerfion. 
We  have,  moreover,  as  to  their  praclice,  a  much 
higher  kind  of  evidence.  In  fupport  of  their  prac- 
tice, I  fhall  produce  the  belt  kind  of  evidence,  and 
afterwards,  whilft  fpeaking  of  the  praclice  of  the 
church  in  fucceeding  ages,  may  occasionally  bring 
forward  fome  of  the  other  kind  of  evidence,  in 
fupport  of  the  apoflles'  praclice. 

As  to  the  praclice  of  the  apoflles,  in  the  adminif- 
tration  of  baptifm,  I  oblerve,  we  have  in  the  fcrlp- 
tures  four  diftincl  fources  oi  evidence.     The 

id  Is  this.  When  baptifm  is  mentioned  by  the 
difciples  and  apoftles,  and  the  common  word  is  not 
ufed,  they  uniformly  employ  one  particular  word, 
and  this  word  is  of  very  determinate  figniflcation, 
and  expreffes  the  bathing,  or  waffling,  of  the  body 
in  water,  as  Heb.  x.  22  :  Having  our  bodies  (lelou- 
raenoi)  washed  with  pure  water.  Acls  xxii.  16. 
Arife  and  be  baptized,  and  (apolousai)  waft,  away 
thy  fms.  1  Cor.  vi.  11.  T$ut  yezrc  fGpo/ousastheJ 
washed.  By  the  determinate  Signification  of  this 
word,  their  praclice  appears  to  be  imraerfioa. 


Serm.  III. ]  Pj  BaplL  %  31 

2.  The  apoflles  were  commanded  to  dip,  immerfe 
or  plunge  all  over  in  water  the  perfons  whom  they 
admitted  to  this  ordinance.  This  is  evident  from  the 
determinate  nullification  of  the  word  to  baptize. 
Says  the  command,  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all 
nations,  baptizing  them,  &c.  We  have  before 
proved  what  is  the  fignification  of  this  word,  and 
confequently  what  Chrift  commanded  his  difciples, 
when  he  lent  them  to  baptize. 

I  do  not  now  fay  that  the  apoflles  immerfed  any  ; 
but  this  is  what  I  fay,  they  were  commanded  thus  to 
do.  I  leave  it  for  you  to  determine,  whether  they 
did,  or  whether  they  did  not. 

3.  I  obferve  to  you,  that  the  New  Teftament, 
wherever  it  fpeaks  of  the  apofdes  baptizing  any,  fays 
they  immerfed  them,  or  dipt  them  all  over  in  water. 
For  this  is  the  plain,  literal  and  common,  if  not  the 
only,  fignification  of  the  word.  I  flill  leave  it  with 
you  to  determine  whether  the  apoflles  did,  or  did 
not,  practice  thus. 

Led  feme  of  you  may  have  forgotten  what  I  have 
before  proved  to  you,  and  confequently  entertain 
fome  doubt,  whether  baptifm  may  not  fometimes 
figoify  the  explication  of  water  in  a  different  way  • 
we  will  make  two  or  three  obfervations. 

1.  The  plain,  literal  and  common  frniflcation  of 
the  word  is  to  immerfe,  overwhelm, dip,  or  to  plunge 
ah  over. 

2.  There  appears  to  be  no  evidence,  tl  at  it  is 
ever  ufed,  fo  much  as  once,  in  any  part  oi the  Bible, 
to  fignify  the  application  of  water  in  any  other  fenfe. 
Even  in  thofe  paftages  where  I  have,  in  time  pail, 
fuppofed  that  the  meaning  might  be,  and  probably 
was,  writhing*  without  immerfion,  the  fenfe  appears 
to  be,  putting  into  water  or  immerfion,  and  not 
what  we  commonly  underftand  by  the  word  waiting. 


32  The  Mode  and  Subjects      [Serin.  III. 

Of  this  you  may  be  convinced,  by  confidering  the 
treatment  to  which  the  Jews  were  accuftomed  with 
refpeft  to  thofe  veffels  which  were  ceremonially  un- 
clean. They  were  to  baptize  them,  or  put  them 
into  water,  as  you  may  fee,  Levit.  xi.  32:  "  And 
upon  whatfoever  any  of  them,  when  they  are  dead, 
doth  fall,  it  fhall  be  unclean  ;  whether  it  be  any 
vefTel  of  wood,  or  raiment,  or  Jfkin,  or  fack  ;  what- 
soever vessel  it  be,  wherein  any  work  is  done,  it  mud 
be  put  into  water,  and  it  fhall  be  unclean  until  the 
even  ;  fo  it  fhall  be  cleanfed." 

3.  I  will  obferve  to  you,  that  it  would,  raoft  visi- 
bly, be  a  reflection  upon  the  Great  Teacher,  who 
came  from  God,  to  fuppofe  that  he  fhould,  when 
appointing  a  pofitive  inftitution,  ufe  words  afide  from 
their  plain  and  commonly  received  fenfe,  that  too 
without  giving  any  intimation  of  his  ufing  the  words 
in  any  fenfe  differing  from  the  common,  efpecially 
when  he  was  fetting  up  a  new  inftitution,  about 
which  his  mod  faithful  followers  could,  in  all  fuc- 
ceeding  generations,  know  nothing  but  from  the 
words  ufed  in,  and  about,  the  inftitution.  Does  not 
all  this  appear  plain  and  reafonable  ? 

Now  the  Bible,  in  the  plain,  literal  and  common 
fenfe  of  the  words  which  it  ufes,  fays,  the  apoftles 
dipt,  plunged  or  immerfed,  all  fuch  as  they  admitted 
to  baptifm.  You  will  judge  for  yourfelves  whether 
the  apoftles  pra&iced  thus,  or  whether  they  did  not. 

4.  The  practice  of  the  apoftles  is  farther  illuftra- 
ted  and  confirmed  by  what  Paul  tells  the  Roman 
and  ColofTian  chriftians,  with  refpecl  to  what  took 
place  when  they  received  the  ordinance  of  baptifm. 
He  fays  to  the  former,  "  We  are  buried  with  him 
by  baptifm  into  death  :"  To  the  other  he  fays, 
"  Buried  with  him  in  baptifm."  Paul  fpeaks  of  this 
matter  as  a  thing  perfectly  underftood  by  chriftians 


Serm.  III.]  of  Baptism.  33 

in  his  time,  and  ufed  it  as  an  argument  to  promote 
their  weanednefs  from  the  world,  and  growth  in 
fancYification.  But  have  not  you  either  pafTed  over 
tbefe  and  fimilar  paffages,  without  noticing  them, 
or  confidered  them  rather  hard  to  be  underftood  ? 
13ut  how  eafy  is  it  tounderfland  them,  provided  the 
apoflles  practiced  as  the  fcriptures  fay  they  did  !  I 
flill  leave  it  with  you  to  determine  for  yourielves, 
how  the  apoflles  practiced. 

This  is  the  bed  evidence  which  the  nature  of  the 
fubject  admits.  This  matter,  the  apoflles'  practice, 
was  tranfacted  many  ages  fince.  We  have  the  tes- 
timony of  the  fcriptures  as  to  what  it  was ;  this  is 
evidence  enough  :  however,  we  fhall  occafionaliy 
add  the  teflimony  of  men. 

We:  fhall  now  attend  to  the  practice  of  the  church, 
and  difcover,  if  we  can,  how  it  was  for  ages  after 
the  apoflles.  The  befl  evidence  which  this  part  of 
my  fubject  admits  is  that  of  human  teflimony*.  I  by 
no  means  reft  the  merit  of  the  caufe  on  this  evidence. 
At  the  fame  time,  it  may  weaken  the  prejudices  of 
fome,.  and  be  a  mean  of  confirming  others  in  the 
belief  of  the  truth. 

It  appears  fo  plain  a  cafe,  that  we  can  hardly 
refufe  affent  to  it,  that  as  the  church  hath,  for  a 
feries  of  ages,  practiced,  fo  have  they  believed.  When 
we  fhall  fee  what  their  practice  hath  been,  we  fhall 
the  more  eafily  concede  that  their  belief  hath  been 
fimilar. 


*  Chrift's  promife  to  his  apoflles,  to  their  fucceffors,  and  to  the 
church,  may  afTure  us,  that  the  ordinance  of  baptifm,  by  which  his 
people  fhould  be  diftinguifhed  from  the  world,  would  ever  con- 
tinue. Therefore  could  we  know  what  the  church  hath  always 
practiced,  efpecially  that  part  of  it  which  hath  been  mod  feparate 
from  the  world,  then  their  practice  would  afford  a  flrong  argu- 
ment in  favor  of  what  the  inftitution  intended. 


34  The  Mode  and  Subjects      [Serm.  III. 

What  is  nowbefore  us  is  to  produce  and  to  receive 
evidence  relative  to  the  practice  of  the  primitive 
church.     It  is  the  following  : — 

i.  This  evidence  confifts  in  the  united  teftimony 
of  both  thofe  who  practiced  the  administration  of  the 
ordinance  by  immerfion,  and  thofe  who  ufed  fprink- 
ling,  and  called  it  baptizing* 

Mofheim,  a  very  noted  church  hiftorian,  and  not 
Very  friendly. to  the  Baptifts,  bears  direct  teftimony, 
that  John,  ChriiVs  forerunner,  and  the  church,  in 
the  firfl  ages  of  chriftianity,  practiced  immerfion  as 
the  mode  of  baptizing*  The  following  you  may 
take  as  a  fample  of  his  evidence.  "  The  exhorta- 
tions of  this  refpectable  MefTenger  (John)  were-  not 
without  effect,  and  thofe  who,  moved  by  his  folemn 
admonition,  had  formed  the  refolution  of  correcting 
their  evil  difpofitions,  and "amending  their  lives,  were 
initiated  into  the  kingdom  of  the  Redeemer  by  the 
ceremony  of  immerfion,  or  baptifm*." 

Speaking  of  the  church  in  the  fecond  century,  he 
fays,  "  The  perfons  that  were  to  be  baptized,  after 
they  had  repeated  the  creed,  confeiTed  and  renounced 
their  fins,  and  particularly  the  devil,  in  his  pompous 
allurements,  were  immerfed  under  water,  and  re- 
ceived into  Chrift's  kingdom  by  a  folemn  invocation 
of  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghoft,  according  to  the 
express  command  of  our  bleffed  Lordf." 

The  Doctor,  fpeaking  of  fome  inferior  fects  of  the 
feventeenth  century,  and  particularly  of  a  feci  called 
Collegiants,  fays,  "  Thofe  adult  perfons,  that  defire 
to  be  baptized,  receive  the  facramentof  baptifm  ac- 
cording to  the  ancient  and  primitive  manner  of  cele- 
brating that  inditution,  even  by  i?nmersion\" 

*  Century  I.  chap.  iii.  feet.  3. 

f  Century  II.  Part  ii.  chap.  v.  feet.  12. 

j  Vol.  v.  p.  488.  American  Edition. 


Serm.  III.]  of  Baptism.  $$ 

Mr.  Bailey,  in  his  Etymological  Englifh  Diction- 
ary, fays,  "  In  ancient  times,  this  (baptifm)  being 
performed  by  immerfion,  the  perfons  fo  initiated 
went  into  a  river,  &c.  and  were  plunged. ** 

John  Calvin,  in  his  Institutions,  book  IV.  chap, 
xv.  feci:.  19,  fays,  "  It  is  certain  that  the  manner  of 
dipping  was  ufed  of  the  old  church*" 

Here  are  three  fubftantial  witneiTes.  Thefe  might 
be  fufficient,  feeing  there  is  not  one  to  be  found  who 
will,  or  dares,  give  direft  and  pofitive  teflimony 
againd  the  truth  of  what  thefe  affirm.  But  fince 
there  are  an  holt  who  (land  ready  to  give  in  their 
teflimony,  even  againft  their  own  practice,  we  will 
hear  what  two  more  of  them  will  teftify,  relative  to 
the  important  caufe  now  on  trial. 

Thefe  two  fhall  be  Dr.  Cave  and  the  famous  Mr. 
Baxter. 

Dr.  Cave,  a  great  fearcher  into  antiquity,  fays, 
"  That  the  party  baptized  was  wholly  immerfed,  or 
put  under  water,  which  was  the  common,  constant 9 
and  universal  cuftom  of  thofe  times  ;  whereby  they 
did  fignificantly  exprefs  the  great  end  and  effects  of 
baptifm,  representing  Chrift's  death,  burial  and  re- 
furre&ion,  and,  in  conformity  thereto,  our  dying 
unto  fin,  the  deftruclion  of  its  power,  and  our  refur- 
re&ion  to  a  new  courfe  of  life*,"  &c. 

Mod  remarkable  is  the  teilimony  which  Mr. 
Baxter  gives  to  this  truth,  in  the  following  words  : 
"  It  is  commonly  confeffed  by  us  to  the  Baptifts  (as 
our  commentators  declare)  that  in  the  apoftles'  time, 
the  baptized  were  dipped  over  head  in  water,  and 
this  fignifieth  their  profeflion  both  of  believing  the 
burial  and  refurre&ion  of  Chrili,  and  of  their  own 
dying  unto  fin,  and  living,  or  rifmg  again,  to  newnefs 

*  Ten  Letters. 


36  The  Mode  and  Subjects      [Serm.  III". 

of  life,  or  being  buried  and  rifen  again  with  Chrift, 
as  the  apoftle  expoundeth  baptifm,  Col.  ii.  12,  and 
Rom.  iv.  6.  And  though  (faith  he)  wc  have  thought 
it  lawful  to  difufe  the  manner  of  dipping,  and  to  ufe 
lefs  water,  yet  we  prefurae  not  to  change  the  ufe 
and  fignification  of  it ;  fo  then  he  that  fignally  pro- 
feffes  to  die  and  rife  again  in  baptifm  with  Chrift, 
doth  signally  profefs  saving  faith  and  repentance  ;  but 
this  do  all  they  that  are  baptized  according  to  the 
apoftolic  pfa&ice*.^ 

As  thefe  witnefTes  teftify,  fo  do  all  learned  and 
pious  men  who  have  critically  attended  to  this  fub- 
ject,  and  afterwards  given  in  any  direct  and  pofitive 
evidence  upon  the  matter. 

2.  The  evidence,  as  to  the  practice  of  the  primi- 
tive church,  confifts  in  the  teftimony  of  men  to  this 
truth,  that  the  church  did  for  thirteen  hundred  years 
practice  immerfion,  fome  extreme  cafes  excepted. 

The  only  evidence  which  I  purpofe  to  give  in  fup- 
port  of  this,  for  the  prefent,  is  the  teftimony  of  the 
author  of  Ten  Letters  to  bifhop  Hoadly  upon  the 
mode  and  fubjects  of  baptifm,  and  the  confeilion  of 
Dr.  Lathrop  that  it  was  even  fo. 

The  author  of  the  Letters  afferts  that  this  was  the 
practice  of  the  church  for  thirteen  hundred  years 
after  the  commencement  of  the  chriftian  era.  Dr. 
Lathrop  afTents  that  this  was  the  fact ;  as  you  may 
fee,  by  reading  his  four  fermons  on  baptifm,  where 
he  gives  thefe  letters  a  particular  attention,  and  is 
fuppofed  to  affent,  where  he  makes  no  objection. 

3.  All  the  churches  in  Europe,  Afia  and  Africa, 
-ever  have  done,  and  do  now,  practice  immerfion,  fave 
thofe  who  are  now,  or  have  been  under  the  jurifdic- 
tion  of  the  pontiffs  of  Rome. 

*  Ten  Letters. 


Scrm.  III.]  of  Baptism.  27 

The  fame  witnefies,  who  bore  their  teftimony  to 
the  !aft  particular,  give  in  their  evidence  in  fupport 
of -this,  and  in  the  fame  way  ;  the  one  afferting  the 
fact,  the  other  ailenting  that  it  is  even  fo. 

4.  The  very  reafons  which  have  been  given,  and 
which  are  ftill  given,  to  juftify  the  contrary  practice, 
are  a  plain  confefiion  that  immerfion,  or  burying  the 
fubje&s  under  water,  was  the  practice  of  the  apoftles 
and  primitive  church  in  the  ordinance  of  baptifm, 
and  what  Chrift  commanded  to  be  done. 

The  reafons  which  are  alledged  why  fprinkling 
may  be  fubftituted  for  immerfion,  are,  the  want  of 
health,  in  fome  inftances  where  they  fuppofe  baptifm 
to  be  neceflary  ;  the  weaknefs  of  con  dilution  with 
refpect  to  fome,  and  the  coldnefs  of  climate  with  ref- 
pect to  many,  and  as  to  all  in  northern  climes  in  the 
wintry  feafon.  Here  is  a  filent  acknowledgement, 
that  it  is  not  the  inflitution,  that  it  is  not  the  per- 
miflion,  of  Chrift,  but  mere  accidental  and  local 
circumftances,  which  make  it  lawful  to  lay  by  the 
command  of  Chrift,  and  to  receive  in  its  ftead  the 
precepts  and  commandments  of  men. 

Mr.  Bailey  fays,  in  his  dictionary,  that  baptifm 
was  performed  in  the  eaftern  and  warmer  countries 
by  dipping  the  perfons  all  over,  but  in  procefs  of 
time,  in  the  weftern  and  colder  countries,  fprinkling 
was  fubftituted  in  the  place  of  dipping. 

Dr.  Lathrop,  in  his  Sermons,  implicitly  confefles 
the  following  extracts  to  be  both  true  and  genuine. 

Mr.  Baxter,  in  his  Paraphrase  on  the  New  Testa- 
ment, obferves  on  Matth.  iii.  6,  "  We  grant  that 
baptifm  then  was  by  walhing  the  whole  body  ;  and 
did  not  the  difference  of  our  cold  country,  as  to  that 
hot  one,  teach  us  to  remember,  •  I  will  have  mercy 
and  not  facrifice*  it  mould  be  fo  here." 

e 


33  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Scrm.  III. 

The  author  of  the  Letters  to  bishop  Hoadly,  in  the 
twenty-third  page,  writes  thus  :  "Mr.  Baxter,  we 
have  already  feen,  excufes  the  matter  by  the  cold- 
riefs  of  our  climate.  Calvin,  the  celebrated  reformer 
of  Geneva,  obferves  in  his  Expofition  of  A  els  viii. 
58, 6  We  fee  here  what  was  the  baptifmal  rite  among 
the  ancients,  for  they  plunged  the  whole  body  in 
the  water.'  Now  it  is  the  cuftom  for  the  minifter 
to  fprinkle  only  the  body,  or  head,  and  he  too  ex- 
cufes  this  fprinkling.  but  how,  I  cannot  well  recoi- 
led, not  having  his  book  at  hand." 

Biihop  Burnet,  though  he  thus  defcrihes  the  pri- 
ir/uive  baptifm,  t;  With  no  other  garments  but  that 
might  ferve  to  cover  nature,  they  at  firft  laid  theoi 
down,  as  a  man  is  laid  in  the  grave,  and  then  they 
faid  thefe  words,  1  baptize,  or  warn,  thee  in  the  name, 
&c.  Then  they  raifed  them  up  again,  and  ckaa 
garments  were  put  upon  them  ;  from  whence  came 
the  phrafes  of  being  baptized  into  Chrifl's  death,  of 
being  buried  with  him  by  baptifm  into  death,  of  our 
being  rifen  with  Chritl,  and  of  our  putting  on  the 
Lord  Jefus  Chrift  ;  of  putting  oil  the  old  man,  and 
putting  on  the  new;"  and  though  he  juilly  obferves, 
that  facraments  are  pofitive  precepts,  which  are  to 
be  meafuied  only  by  the  inditution,  in  which  there 
is  not  room  left  for  us  to  carry  them  any  farther  \ 
yet  forgetting  his  own  meafure  of  the  inuVitution, 
viz.  the  party  baptized  was  laid  down  in  the  water, 
as  a  man  is  laid  in  the  grave,  he  fays,  "  The  danger 
in  cold  climates  may  be  a  very  good  reafon  for 
changing  the  form  of  baptifm  to,  fprinkling*." 

I  propofc,  for  the  prefent,  to  note  but  one  quota- 
tion more,  and  that  fliall  be  in  the  words  of  Dr. 
Wall,  as  quoted  in  the  Letters.     The  Doclor  in 

*  Burnet's  Exposition  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles. 


Serm.  IIL]  tf  Baptism.  39 

giving  the  reafonswhy,  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  reign, 
the  cuftom  of  dipping  was  laid  aiide,  cbferves,  "  It 
being  allowed  to  weak  children  to  be  baptized  by 
affufion,  many  found  ladies  and  gentlemen  firft,  and 
then,  by  degrees,  the  common  people,  would  obtain 
the  favor  of  the  pried  to  have  their  children  pafs  for 
weak  children,  too  tender  to  endure  dipping  in  the 
water*."         Now, 

v.  It  may  be  eafy  for  you  to  gather  what  is  the 
outward  and  viilble  part;  of  the  ordinance  of  baptifm. 

It  is  to  immerfe  proper Tubj eels  in  water,  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghoft*  This  is  the  outward  and  vifible  part  of  bap- 
tifm,  the  fcriptures  being  judge;  this  literal  and 
plain  meaning  of  the  command  being  judge  ;  the 
practice  of  the  apoftles  being  judge  ;  the  practice  of 
the  church  for  more  than  a  thoufand  years  beini: 
judge  ;  and  even  if  we  appeal  to  thofe  who  refufe  to 
practice  thus,  they  add  their  teilimony,  that  this  is 
what  was  commanded.  They  pretend  not  to  fay, 
that  any  new  command  hath  been  given,  or  that  the 
old  one  hath  ever  been  changed.  What  {hall  we 
.  fay  to  thefe  things ! ! ! 

I  conclude,  by  fubmitting  a  qneftion,  and  a  few 
inferences,  for  your  confideration. 

The  queftion  is,  If  immeriion  be  from  heaven, 
and  fprinkling  from  men,  by  what  authority  do  we 
continue  the  practice  ? 

The  inferences  are — 

1.  We,  who  call  ourfelves  Predobaptifts,  are  as  a 
houfe  divided  againft  itfelf.  To  fay  the  lead,  we 
appear  thus.  Our  champions  will  look  us  in  the 
•race,  and  allure  us,  that  the  Baptifts  have  plain  fcrip- 
ture  for  their  mode,   and  yet  we  have  a  right   to 

*  Vol:  II.  p.  30.  1  Ed. 


43  The  Mode  and  Subjects      [Serin.  III. 

choofe  on  the  fcore  of  convenience,  &c.  what  mode 
is  plcafing  to  us.  Thus  fay  Calvin,  Hoadly,  Owen 
and  others  :  whilft:  in  their  practice  they  have  been, 
in  this  inftance,  like  the  fervant  who  knew  but  did 
not  his  lord's  will.  Thefe  good  men  have  confeiTed 
rather  too  much  for  the  credit  of  their  practice,  and 
our  comfort  while  copying  it.  Many,  however, 
have  rifen  up  in  defence  of  our  father's  practice  and 
ours.  They  invent  many  ingenious  hypothefes  to 
prove  it  from  heaven,  but  not  one  affords  a  folid 
-conclufion,  which  (hows  it  to  be  fo. 

2.  According  to  the  light  which  for  the  prefent 
appears,  we  cannot  but  conclude,  that  our  definitions 
of  baptifm  and  to  baptize  are  fcriptural,  accurate 
and  juft.  1£  we  will  do  the  will  of  God,  we  mud 
practice  what  he  commands. 

3.  It  appears  that  it  is  not  left  with  us  to  choofe 
what  mode  we  will  practice  in  administering  or  in 
receiving  the  ordinance  of  baptifm  ;  for  we  find  but 
one  mode  to  it :  and  we  mufl  practice  this,  or  none. 
We  may  fprinkle  a  perfon  in  the  name  of  the  Father, 
&c.  and  we  may  wafti  the  face,  or  any  part  of  a 
perfon,  in  the  fame  facred  name  ;  but  it  is  not  poffi- 
ble  to  baptize  a  perfon  in  this  way.  For  fprinkling, 
or  any  final!,  partial  wafhing,  never  was,  is  not  now, 
nor  ever  wi!l  be,  what  the  fcriptures  mean  by  chrif- 
tian  baptifm. 

4.  That  a  perfon  rauft  be  greatly  unacquainted 
with  the  plain,  literal,  fcripture  account  of  baptifm, 
or  extremely  prejudiced,  not  to  fay  perverfe,  to 
.allirm,  that  the  Bible  fays  nothing  about  immeriion, 
or  burying  ia  water,  for  baptizing.  For  it  fpeaks 
of  this  mode  and  no  other,  in  the  application  of  water 
as  a  gofpel  ordinance. 

The  Baptifts  have  for  their  mode  the  broad  basis 
of  scripture,  antiquity,  and  the  uninterrupted,  and 
fomewhat  universal,  practice  of  the  church, 


Serra.  IV.]  of  Baptism.  4* 

5.  It  appears  that  for  well  informed  Pasdobaptifts 
to  oppofe  the  Baptifts,  as  to  their  mode  of  baptizing, 
is  very  great  wickednefs.  For  the  Baptifts  have  the 
advantage  of  plain  and  exprefs  fcripture  on  their 
fide,  and  the  learned,  critical  and  candid  Psedobap- 
tifts  know  it. 

Ignorance  is  the  beft  and  only  excufe  which  we 
•can  make  for  ourfelves  for  any  oppofition  which  we 
hftve  made  againft  the  ancient  and  primitive  mode 
which  the  Baptifts  have  practiced  in  the  adminiftra- 
tion  of  the  ordinance.  Our  contention  in  this 
matter  hath  not  been  againft  the  Baptifts  merely, 
but  it  hath  been  againft  their  Lord  and  ours. 

Dr.  Lathrop  appears  generoufly  to  grant  the 
truth,  that  immerfion  is  fcripture  baptifm,  and  only 
contends  that  fprinkling  be  alfo  allowed  ;  which 
every  candid  mind  would  readily  do,  were  there  one 
text  of  fcripture  to  fupport  it. 

6.  No  true  chriftian,  if  he  knew  what  he  did, 
would  ever  make  light  of  immerfion,  which  the  Lord 
commands,  and  the  Baptifls  practice,  as  the  mode  of 
baptizing,  or  more  ftrictly,  as  baptifm  itfelf. 


SERMON  IV. 


MATTHEW  XXVIII.  19,  20. 
Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy-Ghoft  ; 
teaching  them  to  abferve  all  things  whatfoever  I  have  com- 
manded you  :  And,  \o,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world.     Amen. 

VV  HILST  difcourfnig  to  you  upon  thefe 
words,  I  have,  as  I  fuppofc,  proved  to  you  what  is 
the  outward  and  vifible  part  of  baptifm.     You  have, 

E  2 


42  The  Mode  and  Subjects      [Scrra.  IV. 

to  appearance,  given  a  fcrious  and  folemn  attention, 
and,  I  hope,  a  candid  one,  to  what  hath  been  faid. 

All  which  I  ail:  of  you  in  this  matter  is,  that  you, 
in  the  fph  it  of  meeknefs,  hear  the  whole,  and  then 
judge  and  practice,  in  fuch  a  manner,  as  you  cannot 
refufe  to  do,  without  doing  violence  to  your  reafon, 
and  without  difobedience  to  the  command  of  Heaven. 

Some  of  you  may  be  afraid  of  difcord  ;  but 
whence,  I  pray  you,  will  difcord  arife  among  brethren? 
Will  a  candid,  prayerful  and  felf-denying  attention 
to  truth  caufe  this  feared  difcord  ?  Hath  truth  a 
tendency  to  produce  difcord  among  the  faithful  fol- 
lowers of  the  Lamb  of  God  ?  I  know  that  once, 
when  Chriit  preached  the  doctrines  of  the  crofs, 
multitudes  of  profefling  difciples  went  back,  and  fol- 
lowed no  more  with  him.  I  hope  it  will  not  be  thus 
with  any  of  you.  But,  my  brethren,  however  it 
may  be  with  any  of  you,  one  thing  is  clear — I  ought, 
1  mud,  declare  to  you,  fo  fad  as  I  profitably  can,  all 
thofe  truths  of  God,  which  appear  neceflary  to  build 
you  up  in  found  faith  and  holy  practice. 

As  I  have  faid  before,  fo  fay  I  unto  you  again, 
that  all  which  I  afk  of  you  is,  to  give  truth  a  candid 
hearing,  and  yield  your  aifent,  when  facts  are  plainly 
proved. 

Nothing  mould,  by  me,  be  thought  too  much  to 
be  done,  to  clear  away  from  your  minds  the  darknefs 
of  prejudice,  together  with  an  erroneous  belief  and 
practice  which  you  may  have  imbibed,  in  part,  by  my 
means.  I  mall,  therefore,  in  this  difcourfe,  after 
haying  attended  to  the  purport,  end  or  defign  of 
baptifm,  anfwer  fome  objections,  which  may  for  the 
prefent  obfiruft  the  force  of  truth. 

Before  we  proceed  to  the  particular  bufmefs  of 
this  difcourfe,  yon  will,  if  you  pleafe,  attend  for  a 
minute  to  a  few  ciueflions  and  their  anfwers. 


Serm.  IV.]  of  Baptism.  43 

1.  Is  it  not  a  plain  cafe,  that  it  is  my  duty  to 
deliver  to  you  the  whole  counfel  of  God,  according 
to  the  bed  light  it  may  pleafe  him  to  afford  me  ? 

2.  Is  it  not  equally  plain,  that  your  duty  is  to 
yield,  not  to  me,  but  to  the  truths  v/hich  I  deliver, 
an  obedient  ear  ? 

3.  Should  you,  from  an  uncandid  and  prejudiced 
mind,  refufe  to  be  converted  by  the  truth,  will  the 
fault  be  mine  ? 

4.  Should  I  exhibit  full  evidence,  as  to  the  fubjecT: 
on  hand,  and  exhibit  that  evidence  clearly  too,  or 
fhould  it  be  that  I  have  done  this,  and  yet  great 
difficulties  arife,  will  you  be  juftified  fhould  you  lay 
the  blame  to  me  ? 

5.  Should  I  teach  you  the  truth,  and  produce  all 
the  evidence  which  you  can  afk  for,  and  you  mould, 
all,  like  faithful  chriflians,  believe  it,  where  or 
whence  will  arife  any  difficulty  among  us  ?  Should 
any  of  you  refufe  to  believe,  will  you  charge  your 
difficulties  to  my  account  ? 

6.  Are  not  all  of  you  determined  that  you  will 
hear  candidly,  and  believe  upon  evidence  ? 

Ycu  will  pleafe  to  give  a  chriitian  and  judicious 
anfwer  to  each  of  thefe  queftions,  and  let  your  prac- 
tice be  conformed  with  the  gofpel  of  our  Lord  Jefus 
Chrift. 

Having  laid  before  you  the  principal  part  of  the 
fac"ts  and  evidence,  which  I  intended,  as  to  the  vifible 
and  outward  part  of  baptifm,  now — 

Lastly,  The  purport,  end  or  deiign  of  the  baptifmal 
inftitution  may  call  for  fome  attention. 

The  purport,  end  or  defign  cf  this  chriflian 
ordinance,  or  inftitution,  appears  to  be — 

1 .  For  a  dividing  line  between  the  kingdom  of  our 
Lord,  and  the  kingdoms  cf  this  world. 


44  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Serm.  IV. 

John  was  Chrift's  forerunner  :  he  was  fent  before 
his  face  to  turn  the  hearts  of  the  fathers  to  the  chil- 
dren, and  the  difobedient  to  the  wifdom  of  the  juft  : 
to  make  ready  a  people  prepared  for  the  Lord*; 
and  that  Chrift  fliould  be  made  maniftft  to  Ifrael, 
therefore,  fays  John,  am  I  come  baptizing  with 
waterf.  John's  million  comprehended  a  double 
purpofe,  to  make  ready  a  people,  prepared  for  the 
Lord,  and  to  manifeft  Him  unto  Ifrael.  The  people 
which  he  inftrumentaily  made  ready,  and  prepared 
to  receive  the  Lord,  he  baptized ;  and  it  appeals 
from  his  rejecting  many  of  the  Pharifees  and  Sad- 
ducees,  that  he  intentionally  baptized  none  otherj. 
The  whole  difcourfe  which  he  had  with  them,  Matt, 
iii.  7  to  12,  is  good  evidence  that  he  admitted  none 
to  baptifm  but  fuch  as  brought  forth  viilble  fruits  of 
repentance.  Such  perfons  he  admitted  among  that 
people  which  he  was  making  ready  for  the  Lord. 
This  people  were,  when  prepared,  to  compofe  that 
kingdom,  or  the  beginning  of  that  kingdom,  which 
ihall  never  be  deftroyed,  and  which  is  an  everlafling 
kingdom,  which  (hall  (land  forever  :  Daniel  ii.  44, 
and  vii.  27.  This  kingdom  Chrift  calls  the  kingdom 
of  heaven,  and  fays,  it  is  not  of  this  world. 

It  appears  to  be  this  kingdom  which  was  now  at 
hand,  ahnoft  ready  to  be  fet  up,  of  which  Chrifb 
fpeaks  to  Nicodemus,  when  he  fays,  John  iii.  5, 
Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he 
cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God. 

All  this  does,  for  fubftance,  meet  the  fentiment 
of  Baptifls  and  Pasdobaptifts  on  this  fubject:.  Both 
fuppofe,that  none  can  belong  to  this  kingdom  without 
being  born  of  water,  or  baptized.  Both  fuppofe 
that  men  may  profelTedly,  or  vifibfy,  belong  to  this 
kingdom,  without  being  born  of  the  Spirit :  but, 

*  Luke  i.  17.  f  John  i.  31.  \  Matr.  iii.  7. 


Serra.  IV.]  of  Baptism.  45 

perhaps,  neither  the  Baptids  nor  Pcedobaptifls, 
would  fay,  that  any  do,  drictly  fpeaking,  belong  to 
this  kingdom,  except  they  have  been  born  of  water 
and  of  the  Spirit.  Our  Lord  faith,  Verily,  verily, 
except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he 
cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  If  a  man 
cannot  enter  into  this  kingdom  but  in  this  way,  he 
cannot  belong  to  it  in  any  other. 

Both  fides  grant,  that  baptifm,  or  to  be  born  of 
water,  is  the  only  way  of  admittance  into  this  king- 
dom. They  are  not  fo  well  agreed  as  "to  what  it  is 
to  be  born  of  water,  whether  it  be  to  be  fprinkled, 
warned,  or  immerfed.  Concerning  this  matter  you 
mud  judge  for  yourfelves. 

This  being  agiven  point, that  thedefignof  baptifm 
is,  that  it  fhould  be  for  a  dividing  line  between  that 
kingdom,  which  the  God  of  heaven  was  to  fet  up  in 
the  latter  day,  and  this  world,  I  would  fugged  for 
your  confideration — Which  draws  the  line  of  fepara* 
tion  mod  clearly  between  this  kingdom  and  all  other 
kingdoms  on  earth  ;  to  enter  it  by  being  fprinkled  ; 
or  by  being  vifibly  and  actually  buried  in  water,  and 
riling  as  it  were  from  the  dead,  to  join  this  kingdom  ? 

I  will  alfo  fugged  one  thing  more  for  your  con- 
fideration :  Which  hath  the  mod  direct  and  natural 
tendency  to  caufe  Chrid's  kingdom  to  appear  to  be, 
as  it  really  is,  not  of  this  world  ?  to  have  almod  all 
admitted  into  it,  in  infancy,  and  fo  in  unbelief,  and 
all  by  fprinkling,  or  by  a  little  water  put  upon  the 
face,  and  the  greater  part  of  them  living  in  open 
wickednefs,  or  manifed  unbelief,  and  unnoticed  by 
the  church  to  which  they  are  fuppofed  to  belong ; 
or,  to  have  none  admitted  but  profefled  believers, 
and  thefe  admitted  in  a  way  which  fignificantly  fays, 
that  they  turn  their  backs  upon  the  world  ;  yea, 
that  they  are  dead  to  the  world,  and  are  rifen  with 


46  ^he  Mode  and  Subjects        [Serm.  IV. 

Chrifl:  ?     I  only  Cuggeft  this  for  your  confideration. 
I  hope  to  attend  to  it  in  its  place,  but  not  to-day. 

2.  The  purport,  end  or  defign  of  baptifm  appears 
to  he  for  a  manifeftation,  that  the  fubjefh  of  it  have 
forfaken  all,  yes,  their  own  lives-,  for  Chrift's  fake 
and  the  gofpel. 

How  can  this  be  more  vifibly  manifefted,  than  by 
being  buried  with  him  in  baptifm  ?  How  can  a  man 
more  vifibly  forfake  all,  than  he  does  when  buried  ? 
How  can  any  one  more  manifeftly  forfake  his  own 
life  for  another,  than  by  voluntarily  fubmitfing 
himfelf  into  the  hands  of  another  to  be  buried  alive  ? 

Is  not  this  agreeable  to  what  Chrifl  faith,  Who- 
foever  he  be  of  yen  that  forfaketh  not  all  that  he 
hath,  he  cannot  be  my  difciple  ? 

3.  It  appears  to  be  for  a  reprefentation  of  our 
being  waflied  from  our  fins  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb. 

John,  the  revelator,  faith,  fpeaking  of  Jefus  Chrifl 
the  faithful  witnefs,  "  Unto  him  that  loved  us,  and 
waflied  us  from  our  fins  in  his  own  blood. "  This 
is  a  figurative  expreflion,  fhowing  at  once  the  pro- 
curing caufe,  the  blood  of  Chrift,  and  the  gracious 
effefr,  our  fouls  purged  from  dead  works  to  ferve 
the  living  God.  Can  any  natural  fign  reprefent  this 
more  fully,  than  does  baptifm,  in  which  our  bodies 
are  waflied  with  pure  water  ? 

4.  The  purport,  end  or  defign  of  this  chriftiaa 
ordinance  appears  to  be  for  the  promotion  of  piety 
in  individuals,  and  purity  in  the  church. 

What  can  have  a.ftronger  tendency  to  move  the 
heart  of  a  chriftian  to  piety  and  weannednefs  from 
the  world,  than  has  the  inftitution  of  baptifm  ?  feeing 
at  every  remembrance  of  it,  he  is  put  in  mind,  how 
Chrift  died  for  sin,  and  how  every  one  who  hath 
believed  and  been  baptized,  has  by  the  ordinance 
fjgnaily  died  to  sin,  been  buried  from  the  world,  and 


Serm.  IV.]  of  Baptism.  47 

raifed  again  to  newnefs  of  life.  Hath  not  this  ordi- 
nance alfo  an  equally  ftrong  tendency  to  preferve 
the  purity  of  the  church,  mould  it  be  adminiftered 
as  we  have  proved  it  ought  to  be,  by  fmmerfion  only? 
and  fhould  another  thing  be  found  to  be  true,  that 
vifible  believers  only  fhould  be  admitted-  to  it,  what 
a  world  of  unbelievers  would  this  fhut  out  cf  the 
church  !  How  differently  would  the  profefTed  church 
of  Jefus  Chrift  appear  from  what  it  now  does  ! 

If  my  information  be  correct,  every  natural  born 
fubjecl:  of  the  crown  of  England  is,  according  to  the 
laws  of  their  national  church,  to  be  baptized5  and 
immediately  confidered  as  a  member  of  the  church. 
This  is,  indeed,  confident,  if  all  the  parents  have,  in 
any  pad  period,  been  pro  ft  ly  ted  to  the  chriftjap 
religion,  and  if  baptifm  have  come  into  the  place  of 
circumcifion,  and  to  be  adminiftered  to  cLildren  and 
infants,  as  that  was. 

Not  only  fo,  but  probably  nine- tenths  of  the 
inhabitants  of  New  England,  if  not  of  our  nation, 
belong  to  the  church,  according  to  the  profeffed 
belief  of  the  Psedobaptids.  Upon  the  fame  princi- 
ple I  prefume  that  more  than  three-fourth's  of  all  the 
adults  in  this  and  the  neighbouring  towns  belong  to 
the  church,  and  have,  if  the  principle  be  according 
to  the  gofpel,  a  right  to  require  admittance  to  the 
Lord's  fupper,  and  baptifm  for  their  children.  Then, 
upon  the  fame  principle,  would  their  children  be 
members  of  the  church,  and  entitled  to  all  the  privi- 
leges of  God's  houfe,  as  they  come  to  years,  and 
nothing  fliort  of  grofs  immorality  could  judify  their 
cxclufion.  Does  this  look  as  though  ChriiVs  king- 
dom were  not  of  this  world  ? 

5.  The  purport,  end  or  defign  of  baptifm  appears 
to  be  well  defcribed  by  Dr.  Goodwin,  in  the  follow- 
ing words  :  "  The  eminent  thing  flgnificd  and 
represented  in  baptifm  is  not  ffngly  the  bleed  of 


48  The  Mode  and  Subjects      [Serm.  IV. 

Chrift,  as  it  washes  us  from  our  fins,  but  there  is  a 
further  reprefentation  therein  of  Chrift's  death, burial 
and  refurrection,  in  the  baptized  :  and  this  is  not  in 
a  bare  conformity  to  thrift,  but  is  a  reprefentation 
of  a  communion  with  Chrift  in  his  death  and  refur- 
reclion ;  therefore  it  is  faid,  We  are  buried  with 
him  in  baptifm,  and  u herein  we  are  rifen  with  him, 
&c.  And  moreover,  here  it  is  that  theanfwer  of  a 
good  confcience,  which  is  made  the  inward  effecl:  of 
this  ordinance,  1  Peter  iii.  21,  is  there  alfo  attributed 
to  Chrift's  refurree*Hon,  as  the  thing  fignifled  and 
reprefented  in  baptifm ;  and  as  the  caufe  ,of  that 
anfwer  of  a  good  conference,  even  baptifm  doth  now 
fave  us,  as  it  is  a  figure  of  falvation  by  Chrift. " 

6.  The  purport,  end  or  defign  of  the  ordinance 
appears  to  be  to  point  out,  or  ftiadow  forth,  the  for- 
givenefs  or  remiflion  of  fins,  and  the  being  cleanfed 
from  them.  Hence  the  propriety  of  fcripture  ex- 
preilions,  which  are  like  the  following  :  The  baptifm 
of  repentance  for  the  remiflion  of  fins,  Mark  i.  4. 
Arife  and  be  baptized,  and  wafh  away  thy  fins,  A£te 
xxii.  16.  Here  it  is  worthy  of  the  critical  reader's 
notice,  that  the  word  tranflated,  wash  away,  is 
apolousai,  which  fignifies  to  waft  clean,  or  to  wafh 
out  a  ftain,  as  well  as  to  wafh  away.  It  is  alfo 
worthy  to  be  bbferved,  that  the  word  loud,  whence 
this  is  derived,  is  the  only  word,  or  theme,  fave 
baptizb,  which,  in  the  New  Teftament,  fignifies  to 
wafh  the  body.  This  being  well  confidered,  it 
cannot  be  doubted,  but  baptifm  is  a  moft  figniricant 
reprefentation  of  the  remiflion  of  fin,  or  ciearifing 
from  it. 

Lastly,  The  purport,  end  and  defign  of  the 
ordinance  of  baptifm  appears  to  be,  for  an  open  and 
maniieft  declaration  that  thofe  who  receive  it,  do 
heartily,  and  of  a  ready  mind,  put  on  Chrift,  enter 
into  his  fervice,  receive  him  to  be  their  Prophet, 


Serm.  IV.]  of  Baptism.  49 

Pried  and  King,  and  covenant  to  be  for  him,  and  for 
him  only.  Accordingly  it  is  faid,  As  many  as  were 
baptized  into  Chrift,  have  put  on  Chrifr. :  they  have 
put  on  his  name,  his  felf-denying  profeilion,  his 
(offering,  defpifed,  but  glorious  caufe. 

Is  the  purport,  end  and  dcdgn  of  baptifm  as  hath 
been  now  dated,  then  the  mode  is  immeriion  ;  and 
thofe  who  change  the  ordinance  from  dipping  to 
sprinklings  and  apply  it  to  unbelievers,  pervert  the 
ordinance,  lofe  its  import,  and  make  it  quite  another 
thing.     This  we  have,  for  years,  ignorantly  done. 

We  will  now  attend  to  the  arguments,  which  the 
late  Rev.  John  Cleaveland  hath  left  us  in  fupport  of 
sprinkling,  as  being  authentic  baptifm.      This  Mr. 
Cleaveland  was,  and  1  believe  juftly  too,  efleemed  as 
one  of  the  mod  pious  ar^j  faithful  fervants  of  Chrift. 
Whilfl  I  was  favour  with  aperfonal  acquaintance 
with  hitn,  he  ItOoci  very  high  in  my  eftimation,  for 
his  unaltered  piety,    and  fervent  fimplicity,  as  a 
preachy  0f  the  everlading  gofpel.     I  dill  reiam  the 
■anLe  opinion  of  the  good  man.     But  great  and  good 
men  are  not  always  wife.       In   any  indance  where 
their  wifdom  hath  failed  them,  we  fhould  be  careful 
how  we  follow.     The  Bereans  would  not  take  Paul 
for  a  guide,  without  fird  bringing  him  to  the  thmdard 
of  divine  truth.  The  Bereans  were  judified.  Should 
we  treat  Mr.  C.  in  the  fame  way,  he  could  not,  and 
I  am  inclined  to  think  he  would  not,  though  he  were 
living,  condemn  us.      I   might   let   his,  works  and 
arguments  in  fupport  of  fprinkling  deep,  were  it  not, 
that  fome  of  you,  my  people,   and  perhaps  others, 
may    by    them,  in    one  particular,   be  kept   from 
beholding  Chrid,  as  in  an  open  glafs. 

The  good  man's  object  was,  to  prove  that  baptifm 
by  fprmkling  is  authentic,  or  is  fcriptural ;  or  that 
Sprinkling  is  baptifm. 


53  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Serm.  IV* 

I  will  now  lay  before  you  bis  fuppofed  ftrong 
arguments  by  which  he  fupports  the  validity  of 
jprinkling  for  baptizing.  After  dating  the  principles 
of  the  Baptifts,  as  to  the  ordinance  now  confidering, 
his 

lfc  Argument  is,  <(  Their  learned  men  know  that 
the  word  baptizo  in  Luke  xi.  38,  and  baptismous  in 
Mark  vii.  2 — $,  are  ufed  to  fignify  the  fame  as  niptb 
is,  i.  e.  proper  wafhing,  or  making  clean  by  the  ap- 
plication of  water,  in  cafes  that    do  not  neceffarily 
require  dipping  as  the  mode  of  waftiing."  The  anfwer 
to  this  is  :    That  neither  the  learned  men  among 
the  Baptifts,  nor  the  learned  among  any  other  clafs 
of  men,  know  any  fuch  thing.      Be  fides,  baptist  he 
in  Luke,  and  baptismous  in  Mark,  have  reference  to, 
aud  mean,  a  ceremonial,  a  religious,  or  rather,  as 
may  be  more  properly  called  in  thefe  inftances,  a 
fuperflitious  wafhing.  What  is  meant  by  a  ceremonial 
wafhing  you  may  fee  by  looking  into  rhe  ceremonial 
law:  Levit.  xi,  32,  and  in  Numb.  xix.  19,  where 
you  will  find  that  this  ceremonial  wafhing  was,  to 
put  into  water,  or  to  bathe  one's  flefh  in  water.  You 
hence  fee  that  thefe  two  paffages,  with  which  Mr. 
Cleaveland  lays  the  foundation  of  his  fupport  of 
forinkling  for  baptifm,  utterly  fail  him,  and  come  in 
as  auxiliaries  to  confirm  immerfipn  as  the  only  fcrip- 
ture  baptifm.     I  will  not  fay  that  niptb  is  never  ufed 
to  fignify  ceremonial   wafhing,  and  fo  intend  the 
wafhing,  or  putting  the  hands  into  water,  (pugme) 
with  abundance  of  exa&nefs,  as  Dr.  Doddridge  ex- 
pounds it;  or  up  fo  the  elbows,  as  L' Enfant  renders 
it.      But  one  thing  is  evident  to  all  who  will  examine 
the  texts,  and  compare  them  with  the  ceremonial 
wafhings  of  the  ceremonial  law,  in  conformity  with 
which  the  Jewifh  doctors  meant  to  have  their  tradi- 
tional ceremonies,  that  baptizo  and  baptismos  are  not 


Scfm.  IV.]  of  Baptism.  51 

ufed  in  the  fenfe  in  which  niptb  generally  is.  In 
every  point  of  view,  Mr.  Cleaveland's  texts  utterly 
fail  him,  and  go  to  deftroy  the  cuftom  or  tradition 
he  brought  them  to  fupport.  Befides,  I  do  not  find 
that  baptizo  is  ufed,  in  any  place,  for  wafhing  the 
hands,  or  for  wafhing  or  dipping  a  part  of  the  body, 
or  any  other  thing.     Mr.  Cleaveland's 

2d  Argument  is  built  upon  Hebrews  ix.  10,  where 
the  apoftle  fpeaks  of  {diaphoroh  baptismois)  divers 
wafhings.  Here,  where  the  apoftle  is  fpeaking  of 
divers  ceremonial  wafhings,  or  bathings,  Mr.  Cleave- 
land,  without  the  lead  poflible  evidence,  concludes 
the  apoftle  means  divers  fprinklings. 

The  fame  anfwer  which  was  given  to  the  firft 
argument  belongs  to  this,  as  Mr.  Cleaveland  has 
produced  no  evidence,  that  (baptisrr.ois)  wafhings,  or 
bathings,  means  fprinklings,  fave  that  in  the  13th 
and  2 1  ft  verfes.  The  apoftle  makes  ufe  of  the  word 
fprinkle,  when  fpeaking  of  the  application  of  blood, 
and  fpeaking  of  the  unclean,  fays,  they  are  rantized, 
and  adds,  almoft  all  things  are  by  the  law  purged, 
catherized,  not  bapt,z?d^  with  blood.  It  is  not  a  little 
furprifing  that  a  man  of  Mr.  C's  good  fenfe  fhould  fay, 
and  that  Dr.  Lathrop,  and  other  men  of  erudition, 
fhould  follow  him,  in  faying,  thefe  different  iprink- 
lings,  in  the  1 3th  and  2 1  ft  verfes,  refer  to  baptismois9 
when,  had  they  looked  three  words  farther,  they 
would  have  found  them  to  be,  kai  dikaiomasi  sarkos9 
the  literal  Englifh  of  which  is,  "  The  ordinances  of 
God  concerning  the  ceremonial  rites  of  bloody  facri- 
fices  ]"  Had  they  looked  into  their  Greek  Tefta- 
ments,  they  might,  with  eafe,  have  feen  that  their 
argument  would  not  bear  examination.  Surely,  had 
thefe  gentlemen  had  the  right  of  the  queftion,  they 
never  would  have  compelled  the  apoftle  to  explain 
by  the  fprinkling  of  blood,  what  he  meant  by  bathings 


5 1  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Scrm.  IV. 

cr  warnings  with  water.  Perhaps  a  more  forced 
exposition,  of  fcripture  is  feldom  heard.  Befides,  the 
apoflle  told  them,  by  placing  what  is  tranflatcd, 
carnal  ordinances,  between  clivers  warnings  in  the 
xoih,  and  fprinkling  in  the  13th  and  21ft  verfes,  that 
he  intended  no  fuch  thing  as  they  fuppofed.  If  I 
miftake  not,  Mr.  C's 

3d  Argument  is  an  attempt  to  prove  that  baptb 
and  baptizb  are  ufed  to  lignify  fomething  more  than 
10  dip,  pat  into  water,  &c.  When  the  good  man 
brought  forward  his  argument  he  forgot— &c. — 
which  belongs  to  his  quotation  from  Dr.  Gale,  and 
which  includes  immerfion  and  overwhelming,  and 
which  comprifes  the  whole  which  Mr.  C.  has  proved 
that  baptizb  fignifies.  But,  waving  his  forgetf  ulnefs, 
we  will  attend  to  what  he  fays.  All  which  he  appears 
to  do  here  is,  to  fhow  that  baptb,  or  baptizb,  are  ufed 
to  wafh,  dip  and  wet  with  fprinkling  the  dew  from 
heaven,  and  to  overwhelm.  That  is,  bapfo  fignifies 
to  dip,  put  into  water,  wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven, 
&c.  and  baptizb  fignifies  to  dip,  put  into  water  and 
overwhelm.  What  is  the  confequence  ?  According 
to  Mr.  C.  it  is  this :  Becaufe  baptb  is  fometimes  ufed 
lo  fignify  one's  being  wet  with  the  diftilling  dew  of 
heaven,  &c.  therefore  baptizb  fignifies  the  fame  thing: 
Becaufe  bapfo  fignifies  in  one  place  to  wafh  without 
dipping,  therefore  baptizb  fignifies  to  wafh  without 
dipping  ;  and  becaufe  baptb  is  fometimes  ufed  to 
iignify  to  colour,  or  (lain,  by  afpeifion  or  the  like, 
therefore  baptizb  is  ufed  in  the  fame  fenfe  ;  therefore 
fprinkling  is  authentic  baptifm.  What  evidence,  I 
pray  you,  my  hearers,  is  there  in  all  this  ?  Yes,  what 
ihow  or  appearance  of  evidence  is  there  in  all  this  ? 
Would  ten  thoufand  fuch  arguments  afford  you  the 
lead  conviction,  or  gain  your  affent,  where  you  had 
a  cent  to  lofe  ? 


£erm.  IV.]  of  Baptism.  $$ 

Every  perfon  of  fenfe,  who  is  acquainted  with  the 
Greek,  would,  generally  fpeaking,  allow  Mr.  C's 
premifes,  that  bapto,  in  different  places,  fignifies  the 
application  of  water  in  different  ways ;  and  that 
baptizo  fometimes  fignifies  overwhelming.  But  no 
perfon,  who  underftands  the  matter,  will  allow  his 
conclufion,  for  it  hath  no  connection  with  the 
premifes. 

His  argument,  in  plain  Englifh,  is  this  :  The  verb 
to  wet,  fometimes  fignifies  to  fprinkle,  as  in  a  heavy 
dew  we  fay  it  fprinkles  or  wets ;  the  verb  to  over- 
whelm fometimes  fignifies  to  cover  all  over  with 
water,  as  is  the  beach,  by  the  flowing  of  the  tide. 
Of  confequence,  to  overwhelm  is  to  fprinkle  ;  there- 
fore to  fprinkle  is  authentic  overwhelming,  or  bap- 
tifm.  The  fallacy  of  this  argument  is  eafily  detected, 
and  with  the  fame  eafe  may  any  one  who  knows  the 
different  fignifications  of  bapto  and  baptizo^  uncover 
die  fallacy  and  complete  inconclufivenefs  of  Mr.  C's 
argument. 

The  plain  truth  is,  he  hath  done  his  fide  a  differ- 
vice,  for  by  fearching  he  hath  found,  and  implicitly 
acknowledges,  though  not  intentionally,  and  (I  fup- 
pofe)  without  knowing  it,  that  no  inftance  can  be 
found  where  baptizo  fignifieth  the  application  of 
water  by  fprinkiing,  or  any  other  way,  which  does 
not  imply  overwhelming,  or  wafliing,  that  is,  a  cere- 
monial wafliing,  which  is  bathing,  or  putting  into 
water.         But — 

4.  There  is  another  argument  upon  which  Mr, 
Cleaveland  chiefly  dwells,  and  upon  which  he  appears 
greatly  to  reft  the  defence  of  his  whole  caufe.  It  is 
his  flrong  hoJdagainfl  immerfion,  and  for  fprinkiing; 
and  it  is  this  :  Baptifm  with  water,  or  baptifm  as  a 
chriftian  ordinance  is  to  fignify  Chrifl's  baptizing 
with  the  Holv  Ghoft.     I  have  no  where  found  that 


54  The  Mode  and  Subjects         [_ Serm.  IV. 

he  hath  proved  that  this  is  the  great  and  principal 
thing  which  baptifm  fignifies  ;  nor  do  I  by  any 
means  obtain  conviction  that  the  mode  of  baptizing 
is  to  be  determined,  with  certainty,  from  this  par- 
ticular thing,  even  fhould  it  be  granted  that  one 
important  defign  of  baptifm  is  to  fignify  Chrift's 
baptizing  with  the  Koly  Ghoft.  But,  as  Mr.  C. 
feems  to  depend  more  upon  theftrength  of  this  argu- 
ment than  he  does  upon  the  ftnength  of  any  other, 
we  will  grant,  for  the  prefent,  that  baptifm  with 
water  was  appointed  particularly,  if  not  mainly,  to 
ret  forth  the  mode  in  which  Chrifl  baptizeth  with 
the  Holy  Ghoft. 

Now  the  great  queflion  is,  In  what  manner,  or 
mode,  by  fprinkling,  or  overwhelming,  did  Chrifl 
Jefus  baptize  with  the  Holy  Ghoft  ?  Mr.  C  in  his 
treatife,  replies  abundantly,  by  fprinkling,  certainly. 
We  will  put  this  fubjeft  to  the  teft,  by  inftancK'\g 
the  moft  remarkable  feafon  which  ever  was,  in  which 
Chrift,  in  a  molt  remarkable,  public  and  aftonifhing 
degree,  was  baptizing  with  the  Holy  Ghoft.  I  pre- 
fmne,  were  Mr.  C.  flow  alive,  he  could  not,  with 
any  face  of  propriety,  object  againft  taking  as  a 
fample  for  the  whole,  the  moft  remarkable  inftance 
which  ever  hath  been,  and,  perhaps,  which  ever 
will  be,  exhibited  of  ChrihVs  baptizing  with  the  Holy 
Ghoft.  I  am  willing  to  fubmit  the  ttrong  argument 
of  Mr.  C.  to  this  great  fample  of  Chrift's  baptizing 
with  the  Holy  Ghoft.  Are  not  all  you,  my  hearers, 
willing  to  leave  the  weight  of  his  argument  to  fuch 
a  decifion  ?  I  am  perfuaded,  you  all  fay,  Yes. 

We  will  then  bring  his  argument  to  the  propofed 
teft. 

The  inftance  which  we  will  take,  for  furely  it  is 
the  m.cil:  aftonifhing  one,  is  that  which  Chrifl:  fore- 
told, as  related,  fttfsT.  5  "•   "Jfrtm  truly  baptized 


Serm.  IV.]  of  Baptism.  55 

with  water,  but  ye  {hall  be  baptized  with  the  Holy 
Ghoft,  not  many  days  hence. "  The  accomplishment 
of  this  prediction  and  promife  we  have  related  in  the 
four  firft  verfes  of  the  next  chapter.  It  is  thus  : — 
When  the  day  of  Pentecoft  was  fully  come,  they 
were  all  with  one  accord,  in  one  place.  And  fuddenly 
there  was  a  found  from  heaven,  as  of  a  rufhing, 
mighty  wind,  and  it  filled  all  the  houfe  where  they 
were  fitting.  And  there  appeared  unto  them  cloven 
tongues,  like  as  of  lire,  and  it  fat  upon  each  of  them. 
And  they  were  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghoft. 

Here  was,  truly,  a  wonderful  inftance  of  ChriiVs 
baptizing  with  the  Holy  Ghoft. 

Here,  1.  All  the  houfe  was  filled  with  the  found, 
wind  or  Spirit  from  heaven.  2.  Cloven  tongues, 
like  as  of  fire,  and  it  fat  upon  each  of  them.  3.  They 
were  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghoft. 

We  here  fee  that  they  were  all  overwhelmed,  for 
all  the  houfe,  where  they  were  fitting,  was  filled,  and 
not  only  were  they  all  overwhelmed,  but  they  were 
alfo  filled. 

It  is  left  with  you  to  determine,  what  becomes  of 
Mr.  C's  argument,  upon  which  he  lays  fo  much 
ffrefs,  and  of  which  he  fpeaks  with  fo  much  confi- 
civenc^,  and  not  unfrequently  with  an  air  of  triumph. 
Is  there  a  word  about  fprinkling  in  any  part  of  it? 
or  is  there  any  thing  which  looks  like  it  ?  Does  it 
not  look  confiderably  like  immertion,  or  overwhelm- 
ing ?  At  leaft,  does  it  not  favor  immerfion,  or  over- 
whelming, as  much  as  it  does  fprinkling  ?  If  fo,  then 
it  proves  nothing  for  fprinkling.  It  is  left  with  you 
to  determine  which  fide  it  favors. 

It  is  poilible,  however,  that  fome  of  you  may 
fuppofe,  that  Mr.  C.  might  intend  that  baptifm,  if  it 
may  be  io  called,  which  the  Holy  Ghoft  minifters, 
when  it  creates  the  foul  anew.     To  this  fuppofrtion, 


$6  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Serm.  IV. 

I  will  juft  obferve,  "  The  wind  bloweth  (faith 
Chrift)  where  it  lifteth,  and  thou  hearefl  the  found 
thereof,  but  canft  not  tell  whence  it  cometh,  or  whither 
it  gocth  ;  fo  is  every  one  that  is  born  of  the  Spirit." 
Would  it  not  be  extreme  folly  to  fuppofe  that  water 
baptifm  reprefents  the  operations  of  the  Spirit,  when 
none  can  know  whence  it  cometh,  or  whither  it 
goeth  ?  It  may  reprefent  the  effect  of  the  Spirit's 
operations,  and  it  is  called,  a  being  born,  not  fprink- 
led,  of  the  Spirit. 

5.  In  reading  Mr.  C's  defence  of  fprinkling,  as 
being  authentic  baptifm,  I  noticed  but  one  more 
diflinct  argument,  and  it  is  this : 

"  N/pto,  baptizo,  louo,  brecho,  pluno,  or  apepluri°y 
all  fignify  to  wain."  The  concluiion  which  he  draws 
from  this  is,  in  fhort,  the  following :  To  baptize  is 
not  to  immerfe,  but  to  fprinkle.  I  fee  no  connection 
between  his  premife  and  conclufion.  Befides,  Mr. 
C.  tells  us,  page  80,  that  the  Jews,  by  adhering  to 
the  tradition  of  the  elders,  obferved  the  warning 
of  hands,  and  divers  other  things,  as  a  religious 
ceremony.  Now,  if  all  the  words,  which  Mr.  C. 
mentions,  ilgnify  to  wafh,  and  yet  fome  of  them 
fignify  common  wafhing,  and  another,  and  that 
bapfizo  fignifies  ceremonial  warning,  and  that  be  to 
put  into  water,  as  is  the  cafe,  what  does  his  argu- 
ment prove?  It  proves  juft  nothing  to  his  point.  Had 
he  proved,  what  he  hath  not  even  attempted,  that 
they  al!  fignify  the  fame  kind  of  wafhing,  and  that 
the  warning fignified  wasnotimmerfion,but  fprinkling 
only,  then  his  conclufion  would  have  followed,  that 
fprinkling  is  baptifm. 

If  the  above  arguments  will  not  fupport  Mr.  C's 
theory,  it  mud  all  come  down,  for  they  are  the 
fubftance,  if  not  all  the  arguments,  which  he  hath 
adduced,  and  I  prefunae  better  cannot  be  found. 


Serm.  IV.]  of  Baptism.  $y 

I  thought  to  have  taken  Dr.  Lathrop's  arguments 
upon  the  fame  fubje&into  confederation  ;  but  upon 
re-examining  them  1  find  there  is  no  material  diflimi- 
larity  between  his  and  Mr.  C's  ;  they  therefore  both 
fhind  or  fall  together.  A  word  or  two  however 
may  be  here  added. 

Dr.  Lathrop  afTures  us  that  Cyprian,  who  wrote 
within  about  one  hundred  and  fifry  years  of  the 
apoftles,  fpeaking  of  fprinkling,  fays,  "  In  the  facra- 
ment  of  falvation  (that  is  baptifm)  when  necessity 
compels,  the  (hortefl  ways  of  tranfacting  divine  mat- 
ters do,  by  God's  grace,  confer  the  whole  benefit." 
The  Dr.  adds,  "The  ancients  practiced  immersion* ." 

By  this  quotation  of  the  Doctor's  from  Cyprian, 
and  confeffton  of  his  own,  being  put  together,  it 
appears,  at  once,  that  all  his  preceding  arguments 
are  erroneous.  For  Cyprian  does  not  intimate  that 
fprinkling  was  from  heaven,  but  fays  it  was  from 
neceflity.  Befides,  his  calling  baptifm  the  ficrament 
of  falvation,  fhows  us  the  error,  whence  the  necefHty 
of  fprinkling  came,  namely,  a  belief  that  theordinance 
of  baptifm  was  neceffary  to  falvation.  This  being 
the  cafe,  and  it  alfo  being  true,  as  the  Doctor  ac- 
knowledges, that  the  ancients  practiced  immtrfion, 
fave  when  neceflity  compelled,  as  they  erroneoufly 
fuppofed,  the  confequence  is  fairly  this,  that  immer- 
fion  is  from  heaven,  the  ancients  beino;  judges  ;  and 
that  fprinkling  is  from  men,  from  neceflity,  or  rather 
from  error. 

1  thought  to  have  added  no  more  upon  the 
Doctor's  mode  of  chriftian  baptifm.  However,  one 
argument  ought  to  be  taken  out  of  his  hands,  left 
it  mifguide  fome  of  his  readers.  He  tells  us  that 
baptizo,  in  Mark  vii.  and  Lukexi.  is  ufed  to  fignify 

*  Page  24,  25. 


5$  The  Mode  and  Subjects       [Serm.  V, 

the  application  of  water  to  the  hands.  The  only 
anfwer  needed  is,  It  is  not  thus  faid  in  Mark,  or 
Luke,  or  in  any  other  part  of  the  Bible.  When 
the  Do&or  fhall  re-examine  the  paffages,  he  will, 
probably,  fee  the  miftake. 

Will  gentlemen,  and  chriftians  too,  forever  conr 
tend  a^aind  immersion,  the  inititution  of  heaven,  and 
for  fprinkling,  which  hath  nothing  but  error  and 
convenience  for  its  fupport  ! 


SERMON  r. 


MATTHEW  XXVIII.  19,  20. 

Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Gboft  -r 
teaching  them  to  obferve  all  things  vvhatfoever  I  have  com- 
manded you :  And,  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even,  unto  the 
end  of  the  world.     Amen* 

1  HAVE  confidence  in  you,  brethren,  that 
ye  will  keep  the  ordinances,  as  I  fhall  deliver  them 
to  you,  and  prove  them  to  be  from  the  word  of  the 
Lord. 

One  thing  I  would  dill  know  of  you,  my  brethren, 
whether  you,  like  the  more  noble  Bereans,  will 
receive  the  word  with  readinefs,  fearching  thefcrip- 
tures,  daily,  that  you  may  know  the  truth  of  what 
you  hear. 

You  will  bear  in  mind,  that  whofoever  loveth 
father  or  mother,  houfe  or  lands,  wife  or  children, 
more  than  Chrift,  is  not  worthy  of  him.  If,  through 
affection  for  any  of  thefe,  you  (hould  refufe  to  obey 
Chrift,  it  will  be  too  evident  that  you  love  them 
more  than  you  do  him,  and  fo  are  not  worthy  of  him. 


Serm.  V.]  of  Baptism.  59 

Should  you  love  any  erroneous  belief  and  practice 
more  than  you  do  the  truths  of  Chrift,  you  will,  fo 
far  as  you  manifefl  it,  prove  that  you  are  not  worthy 
of  him. 

Should  you  defpife  me  for  delivering  and  vindi- 
cating the  truths  of  Chrift  to  you,  you  will,  at  the 
fame  time,  defpife  him.  You  will  therefore  give 
good  heed  to  what  you  fay,  and  to  what  you  do,  in 
this  matter  \  for  if  it  be  of  God,  it  will  fland,  and 
none  can  overthrow  it.  It  is  hoped  none  of  you 
will  be  found  fighting  againft  God. 

This  difcourfe  may  contain  a  review  of  what  we 
have  palled  over,  together  with  fome  application.  In 
my  firft  difcourfe  to  you  on  the  fubjecl,  which  we 
have  dill  before  us,  the  following  are  the  principal 
things,  to  which  we  attended. 

I.  1  propofed  a  number  of  plain  truths,  confldered 
to  be  as  firft  principles,  for  your  attention. 

1.  Baptifm  is  a  pofitive  infli union,  about  which 
we  can  know  nothing,  as  to  its  being  a  chriftian  or- 
dinance, but  from  Chrift,  and  thofe  infpired  by  his 
Spirit,  have  taught  us. 

2.  All,  which  we  are  required  to  believe  and 
practice,  with  refpecl  to  the  chriflian  ordinance  of 
baptifm,  is  declared  to  us  by  Jefus  Chrift,  and  by  his 
forerunner  and  apoftles. 

3.  When  Jefus  Chrift  firft  inftituted  the  ordinance 
of  baptifm,  he  no  doubt  delivered  his  mind  fo  clearly 
and  fully  upon  the  fubject,  that  his  difciples  and 
immediate  followers  underftood  and  practiced,  as  he 
would  have  them. 

4.  Every  thing  which  hath,  by  the  precepts  and 
commandments  of  men,  been  added  iince,  is  afide 
from  the  ordinance,  and  makes  no  part  of  it. 

5.  No  man,  or  body  of  men,  hath  any  more 
authority  to  add  to,  or  diminiih  from,  this  ordinance, 


60  The  Mode  and  Subjects         [Serm.  V. 

than  they  have  to  inftitute  a  new  one  and  call  it 
ChriiVs. 

6.  Whenever,  and  wherever,  the  ordinance  of 
baptifm  is  fo  changed,  as  to  lofe  the  intent  of  the 
inftitution,  then  and  there  the  ordinance  is  loft,  and 
becomes  no  chriftian  ordinance  at  all. 

II.  I  defined  for  your  information  a  number  of 
words  which  appertain  to  the  ordinance  of  baptifm. 

We  found  ail  thefe  to  be  fuft  as  we  might  expect 
to  have  found  them,  provided  immeriion  be  baptifm, 
or  the  mode  in  which  it  is  adrmniftered. 

Baptist  erion,  a  pi  ace  in  which  to  waili  the  bo^y. 
Baptism,  immerficn,  or  dippin  >  one  all  over  in  water. 
Baptizd  fignifles  to  dip,  or  wa(h,  the  body  all  overia 
water.  Lotto  (a  word  feverai  times  ufed  in  reference 
to,  or  fignifying  the  fame,  as  baptifm)  is,  to  wafh, 
to  i  infe,  to  bathe,  &c.  Then, 

III.  I  fet  before  you  all  the  texts  in  the  New 
Teftament  which  relate  either  to  the  baptifm  of 
John,  or  to  that  of  our  Lord  Jefus  Chrift.  In  the 
next  place,  I  propofed  for  your  meditation  the  paf- 
fages  of  fcripture  where  wafhing  is  mentioned,  and 
the  Greek  words  which  are  ufed.  I  then  called  your 
attention  to  thofe  paifages  in  which  fprinkling  is 
mentioned,  and  to  the  Greek  words  which  are  made 
ufe  of.  Lastly,  I  read  to  you  thofe  fcrip^ures  wTliere 
to  dip  is  mentioned,  and  alio  the  Greek  wor^s  which 
are  rendered  to  dip. 

In  not  one  of  the  places,  where  ;ne  ordinance  of 
baptifm  is  brought  to  view,  c}0  we  find  one  word 
about  fprinkling,  or  any  thing  which  looks  like  it. 
In  every  place,  where  t;o  dip  is  mentioned,  we  find  a 
near  relation  to  baptifm  ;  every  word  which  is  ufed, 
coming  from  the.  fame  root  or  theme,  from  which 
baptizz  comes. 


Serm.  V.]  of  Baptism.  61 

As  to  the  word  wash,  we  find  no  relation  between 
the  words  which  fignify  to  wafh,  and  thofe  which 
fignify  to  baptize,  fave  in  thofe  few  inftances  where 
the  meaning  is  to  wafh  the  body,  or  put  into  water, 
or  wafh,  a  thing  all  over.  When  we  come  to  the 
Greek  words  which  fignify  to  fprinkle,  we  find  no 
fimilarity,  or  likenefs,  between  them  and  the  word 
to  baptize. 

In  all  the  places  where  baptizing  is  mentioned, 
not  a  word  is  ufed  which  looks  like  fprinkling ; 
where  fprinkling  is  mentioned,  there  Is  not  a  word 
ufed  which  appears  like  baptifm. 

In  my  next  difcourfe,  I  produced  my  evidence,  that 
my  definitions  of  baptifm  and  to  baptize  were  accu- 
rate and  jufl.  I  dwelt  largely  upon  this  evidence  ; 
for  the  merit  of  the  whole  fubjeft  depends  greatly, 
if  not  entirely,  upon  the  determinate  meaning  of  the 
words,  which  our  Lord  ufed  in  the  inflitution  of  the 
ordinance,  and  when  fpeaking  of  it.  When  we 
know  the  determinate  fignification  of  his  words,  we 
know  what  he  fays,  and  what  we  ought  to  under- 
fland  by  the  words  which  he  ufes.  The  evidence 
which  I  produced,  was,  in  fhort,  the  following. 

i.  The  Greek  Lexicon,  Butterworth's  Concor- 
dance, Bailey's  and  Entick's  Dictionaries,  bear  their 
united  teitimony,  that  the  plain,  literal  and  common, 
if  not  univerfal,  fignification  of  the  words  baptism 
and  to  baptize,  is  immerfion  and  to  immerfe,  bury  in 
water,  to  dip,  or  to  plunge,  a  perfon  all  over  in 
water.  Here  are  four  learned  and  pofitive  witneiTes 
to  the  fame  thing.  Indeed,  they  give  no  other 
fignification,  fave  it  be  to  wafh,  which  we  havefeen 
intends  a  ceremonial  wafhing,  which  is  to  put  into 
water,  or  to  bathe. 

2.  I  repeated  fome  of  the  attendant  or  circum- 
ftaptial  facts,  which  have  relation  to  the  ordinance 


di  The  Mode  and  Subjects  [Serm.  V. 

of  baptifm.  John  baptized  in  the  river  Jordan.  He 
was  baptizing  in  Enon,  near  to  Salim,  becaufe  there 
was  much  %vater  there,  The  word  baptistery  fignifies 
a  place  in  which  to  wafh  the  body  all  over.  Baptism 
fignifies  to  dip,  to  plunge,  immerfe,  or  to  wafh  the 
body  all  ever  in  water.  B  apt  her  fignifies  one  who 
dips,  plunges,  or  wafhes  the  body  all  over  in  water. 
To  baptize  fignifies  to  immerfe,  plunge  under  water, 
or  under  any  other  liquid  thing,  or  to  dip,  or  to  put 
into  water.  To  be  baptized  is  to  be  plunged, 
immerfed,  or  waflied  all  over  in  water. 

Thefe  things  being  true,  is  it  not  eafy  to  determine 
what  the  ordinance  of  baptifm  fignifies  ? 

3.  The  words  baptismos  and  baptizo  have  two,  and 
only  two,  tranflations  in  the  New  Teftament.  Thefe 
two  are  baptism  and  washing.  Where  their  meaning 
is  wafhing,  or  where  they  are  thus  tranflated,  it  is  a 
ceremonial  warning,  which  is  to  put  into  water,  or 
bathe  the  flefli  in  water,  as  you  may  fee,  Levit.  xi. 
32,  Numb.  xix.  19.  When  they  are  tranflated 
baptism  9  or  to  baptize^  the  thing  intended  is  the  bap- 
tifm of  water,  of  fire,  of  fufferings,  or  of  the  Holy 
Ghofl. 

4.  I  brought  forward  feveral  noted  witneffes,  to 
bear  their  united  teftimony,  that  I  had  given  a  juft 
definition  of  the  word  baptizo  ;  thefe  were,  John 
Calvin,  Zanchius  and  Dr.  Owen. 

In  the  next  place  I  mentioned  to  you  that  Paul 
repeatedly  ufes  the  word  hub,  where  he  means  the 
fame  thing  as  where  he  ufes  the  word  baptizo  ;  that 
he  ufes  thefe  words  as  fignifying  the  fame  thing. 
Whereas,  loud  fignifies  to  wafh  and  to  bathe  the  body 
in  water,  and  confequently  baptizo  means  the  fame. 

Lastly ,  I  brought  forward  Paul's  expofition  of  the 
word  baptis?n,  and  fhowed  you,  that  he  expounds  it 
as  being  buried  with  Chrift  in  baptifm,  or  inamerfion. 


Scrm.  V.]  of  Bap  lis m.  6$ 

In  my difcourfe,  which  I  next  preached  to  you,  I 
produced  evidence,  that  the  apoftles  and  primitive 
christians,  not  only  underftood  the  matter  as  Ihave 
ddcribed  it,  bin:  practiced  accordingly. 

In  fupport  of  the  apoftles'  practice,  I  obferved, 
that  the  word  kub{  of  determinate  fignin'cation,  which 
they  ufed  to  fignify  their  practice,  or  what  was  done 
by  them  in  baptifm,  determines  or  fixes  their  prac- 
tice to  be  immeriion.  I  farther  obferved,  that  they 
were  commanded  to  practice  baptifm,  or  to  baptize, 
as  I  have  defenbed  it  ;  and  that  the  fcriptures  teftify, 
that  they  thus  did  ;  and  alfo  that  the  apoftles  fay, 
the  mode  of  baptizing  in  their  day  was,  by  burying 
the  fubjects  in  baptifm. 

For  witnefTes  that  the  primitive  church  practiced 
immeriion,  we  have  Mofheim,  Bailey,  Calvin,  Bax- 
ter, and  many  others,  all  agreeing  in  this  one  point, 
that  the  mode  of  baptizing,  or  baptifm  itfelf,  among 
the  ancients,  was  immeriion.  We  have  alfo  evidence 
that  the  church  thus  practiced,  for  thirteen  hundred 
years,  fome  extreme  cafes  excepted.  Moreover  we 
have  evidence  that  all  the  church,  in  Europe,  in 
Alia,  and  in  Africa,  fave  that  part  of  it,  which  is 
now,  or  hath  been,  under  the  bewildering  power 
of  the  popes,  do  now,  and  ever  have,  practiced 
immerfion. 

Bolides  all  this,  the  very  reafons  which  the  Pa?do- 
baptifts  ailign,  why  they  have  laid  afide  immerfion, 
fhow  that  fprinkling  is  Dot  commanded  by  the  Lord, 
but  is  taught  by  the  precepts  of  men. 

You  fee  we  have  an  ocean  of  witnefTes  and 
evidence  againft  us  ;  and  all,  or  nighly  fo,  from  our 
own  denomination  of  chriftians.  What  a  world  of 
evidence  might  we  reafonably  expect  that  the  Bap- 
tifts  would  be  able  to  bring  for  themfelves  and  againfr. 
us  and  our  practice,  would  we  hear  them,  when  our 


#4  The  Mode  and  Subjects       [Serm.  V. 

own  fide  bring  (o  much  againft  their  own  practice 
and  for  theBaptifts !  Befides,  this  evidence  appears 
to  Hand  in  its  full  force  againft  us,  there  being  no 
oppofite  evidence  to  weaken  its  force.  Indeed  we 
are,  in  this  matter,  much  like  criminals,  who  plead, 
at  leaft  the  leaders  of  them,  guilty  to  the  whole  in- 
dictment. However,  fome  have  made  a  full  plea  of 
not  guilty,  but  in  part.  At  the  fame  time,  numbers 
of  them,  in  their  plea,  have  convicted  thcmfelves  of 
being  guilty  throughout. 

In  the  l.tft  difcourfe,  after  holding  to  your  view 
the  purport,  end  and  defign  of  baptifm,  I  examined 
one  of  their  picas  of,  not  guilty.  But  what  evidence 
did  the  good  inaii  give  of  his  innocence  ?  Can  the 
largelt  ftretch  of  charity  allow  more  than  this,  he 
knew  not  what  he  did?  Was  truth  ever  brought  to 
fuch  ftraits  as  to  require  to  be  fupported  by  fuch 


arguments  ? 


APPLICATION. 


From  a  review  of  the  whole  fubjeft,  the  following 
appear  to  flow  as  necefTary  confequences. 

i.  Whether  we  allow  immerfion  to  be  the  fcrip- 
ture  mode  of  baptifm,  and  the  only  one  which  it 
requires,  or  not ;  one  thing  is  clear,  that  we  have  as 
much  evidence  of  its  being  fo,  as  we  could  have,  on 
iuppofition  that  it  were. 

The  fcriptures  declare,  in  various  ways,  that  this 
is  the  mode,  and  mention  no  other.  The  fcriptures 
expound  ihemfelves  to  mean  immerfion,  or  burying. 

We  find  not  a  fmgle  trace,  in  all  the  fcriptures, 
where  the  ordinance  is  fpoken  of,  of  any  thing  fhort 
of  immerfion  being  mentioned. 

Good  men,  who  are  fkilful  in  the  true  import  of 
words,  have  agreed,  that  the  plain.,  literal  and  accu- 
rate meaning  of  the  word,  fo  baptize,  is  to  immerfe 


feerm.  V.*]  of  Bap/ism.  6$ 

or  bury  in  water,  &c.  Nor  have  any  been  able  to 
fhow  that  in  any  part  of  God's  word  it  hath  any 
oppofite  meaning  or  application. 

The  church  of  Jefus  Chrift  have,  in  all  ages,  un- 
derftood  the  matter  of  baptifm  as  I  have  explained  it. 
We  mud,  however,  except,  for  the  lad  three  or  five 
hundred  years,  many  of  thofe  branches  of  the  church, 
which  have  been,  or  are  now,  under  the  jurifdi&ion 
of  the  church  of  Rome.  The  purport,  end  and 
deilgn  of  baptifm  alfo  intimate  to  us,  that  this  is  the 
manner  of  baptizing. 

Indeed,  if  there  be  any  words  in  the  Greek  lan- 
guage by  which  the  Lord  of  the  Baptifmal  Inftitution 
could  have  told  us  what  he  intended,  the  words  ufed 
do  this.  For  there  are  no  two  words  in  the  language, 
or,  at  leaft,  none  which  have  come  to  our  knowledge, 
which  fo  literally,  fo  uniformly,  and  fo  exprefsly, 
fignify  to  immerfe,  or  warn,  or  bathe  the  body  in 
water,  as  do  the  words  bapiizb  and  hub.  Hence,  if 
immerlion  be  baptifm,  the  Lord,  if  I  may  fo  fay, 
could  not  have  told  us  of  it  in  the  New  Teflament, 
if  the  words  chofen  by  the  Holy  Ghofl,  do  not 
afford  this  information.  If  baptifm  be  immeriicn, 
then  the  two  mod  fuitable  words  have  been  chofen 
to  exprefs  it;  but  if  fprinkling  be  baptifm,  two  words 
which  were  farther  from  the  point  could  not  have 
been  found.  We  find  no  inftance,  in  the  Bible, 
where  they  are  thus  ufed.  In  fliort,  no  two  words, 
which  mention  the  application  of  water  in  any  way, 
are  farther  from  the  idea  of  fprinkling,  than  are  thofe 
two  which  are  ufed  when  baptifm  is  intended.  It 
therefore  appears  that  whiift  we  have  ufed  fprink- 
ling for  baptifm,  we  have  departed  from  the  plain 
and  primitive  import  of  the  words  ufed,  as  far  as  we 
could  without  a  complete  omiffion  of  water.  None 
can  be  at  farther  remove  from  the  inflituted,  fcripture 

g  2 


6$  The  Mode  mid  Subjects       [Serm.  V. 

baptifn,  than  we  have  been,  without  denying  it  ia 
whole.. 

2.  Error  is  very  infmuating  and  deceiving.  Surely 
it  hath  proved  thus  in  the  fubjeft  of  fprinkling. 

Cyprian,  who  wrote  within  about  a  hundred  and 
.fifty  years  of  the  apoflles,  fpeaking  of  fprinkling, 
fays,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Lathrop,  "  In  the  facrament 
of  salvation  (i.  e.  baptifm)  when  necessity  compels,  the 
Shorted  ways  of  tranfa&ing  divine  matters,  do,  by 
God's  grace,  confer  the  whole  benefit. "  Here  we 
fee  the  origin  of  fprinkling  for  baptifm. 

It  was  an  early  error  in  the  church,  that  baptifm 
was  neccifary  to  falvation.  Hence,  when  it  was 
judged,  that  life  would  be  endangered  by  immerfion, 
the  perfon  mud  either  lofe  his  life  by  baptifin,  or  lofe 
his  foul  for  want  of  being  baptized,  or  fome  other 
mode  mud  be  invented.  Or,  if  the  lick  perfon  was 
nighly  dying,  he  mud  be  baptized  without  immer- 
iion,  or  probably  lofe  his  foul,  before  he  could  be 
conveyed  where  the  ordinance  might  be  adminidered. 
Under  thefe  circumftances,  man's  fruitful  invention 
devifed  fprinkling  as  a  fubditute  for  baptifm.  Here 
is  the  origin  of  fprinkling,  as  the  ancients  have 
told  us. 

In  procefs  of  time,  found  ladies  and  gentlewomen 
wifhed  to. have  fprinkling  fubdituted  for  baptifm  in 
their.behalf ;  afterwards  others,  till  at  lad,  it  became 
a  general  cuftpm  in  many  of  the  European  nations. 
In  the  mean  time,  the  Baptids,  and  many  others, 
objected  againd  the  practice,  as  being  contrary  from 
the  command  of  Chrid.  Hence  arofe  the  neceifity 
.of  defending  it,  or  elfe  have  it  confideixd  as  a  de- 
parture from  the  faith.  Matters  being  thus,  the 
invention  of  many  was  in  full  exercife  to  defend 
fprinkling,  as  being  of  divine  origin.  A  number  of 
ccremcnla!  rile?  c:  ihoLcvh>::ii  bw  i  rei&d  into 


Serm.  V.]  of  Baptism,  6y 

this  fervice ;  feveral  palTages  of  the  Mew  Teftament 
were  wrefted  from  their  natural  meaning  to  a  forced 
interpretation  ;  and  out  of  the  motley  mixture  were 
formed  what  were  ftyled  arguments ;  but  fuch  argu- 
ments can  (land  no  longer  than  while  prejudice  lives 
to  fupport  them. 

However,  the  mod  difagreeable  part  is,  a  good 
•number  of  very  pious  and  learned  men  have  been 
carried  away  in  this  whirlpool  of  deception.  Their 
being  deceived  has  deceived  others ;  and  we  are,  or 
have  been,  among  the  deceived. 

3,  Sprinkling  is  not  from  heaven,  but  of  men* 
This  too,  If  I  miftake  not,  by  the  fully  and  fairly 
implied  conceilion  of  thofe,  who  have  written  in  its 
defence. 

If  from  heaven,  why,  in  the  fir{f.  place,  ufe  it  only 
when  neceflity  compelled !  as  was  fuppofed  to  fave 
fouls  from  hell  ?  If  from  heaven,  why,  afterwards, 
ufe  it  only  in  cafes  of  lefs  urgent  necelTity  ?  If  from 
heaven,  why  bring  in  the  coldnefs  of  the  country  as 
an  excufe  for  uling  it  ?  If  from  heaven,  why  not 
mentioned  in  the  inftitution  of  the  ordinance,  or  in 
fome  palTage  where  mention  is  made  of  baptifm,  or 
in  fome  other  place  in  all  the  writings  of  the  Evan- 
gelifts  and  Apoflles  ?  If  from  heaven,  why  not 
intimated  as  being  fo,  by  thofe  who  flrft.  introduced 
it  ?  If  fprinkling  be  from  heaven,  why  fo  many 
inconclusive  arguments  in  its  fupport  ?  Is  the  word  of 
God  deficient  in  this  particular,  and  hath  it  revealed 
what  cannot  be  fupported  by  it  ?  If  from  heaven, 
why  not  commanded,  enjoined,  required,  or  fo  much 
as  once  hinted,  as  being  the  mode  of  a  gofpel  ordi- 
nance, in  any  part  of  that  revelation  which  we  have 
received  from  heaven  ? 

4.  Another  confequence  is,  That  the  fcripture 
mode  of  baptifm  is  immerfion,   and  for  aught  we 


68  The  Mode  and  Subjects       \_  Serm.  V. 

know,  the  only  mode,  and  necefTary  to  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  ordinance  ? 

This  is  the  plain,  literal,  fcripture  fenfe  of  baptifm, 
therefore  this  is  the  plain,  literal,  fcripture  mode. 
The  fcriptures  mention  no  other  mode,  therefore  this 
may  be,  and  is,  for  aught  appears,  the  only  fcripture 
mode. 

5.  From  what  we  have  gone  over,  one  thing 
appears  certain  :  That  Chrifh  never  commanded  any 
of  his  followers  to  adminifter  any  gofpel  ordinance 
by  fprinkling,  and,  at  the  fame  time,  to  fay,  I  baptize. 
For  to  do  thus  would  be  to  command  them  to  dp 
'one  thing,  and  to  fay  that  they  did  another. 

To  sprinkle  is  to  rantize,  which  hath  no  vifible 
connection  with  baptifm.  To  fay,  Chrifl  commanded 
his  difciples  to  rantize,  and,  at  the  fame  time,  to  fay, 
We  baptize,  is  what  no  chriftian  would,  knowingly, 
be  willing  to  fay.  This  would,  if  I  miftake  not,  be 
making  Chrift  the  minifter  of  fin.  But  what  1  have 
long,  implicitly,  though  ignorantly,  done,  others  may 
tf  ill  do. 

6.  Another  confcquence  is,  cuftom  hath  great 
influence  upon  the  human  mind.  It  furely  hath 
upon  us.  For,  even  after  we  have  full  evidence  that 
fprinkling,  for  baptifm,  is  not  from  heaven,  but  was 
the  offspring  of  error,  and  foftered  by  the  dark  ages 
of  papiftical  ufurpation,  we  are  hardly  perfuaded  to 
renounce  it.  But,  my  brethren,  my  expectation  is, 
that  after  you  have  fearched  your  Bibles  through 
and  through,  and  find  nothing  of  it  there,  you  will 
give  it  up. 

Should  the  Lord  enquire  of  us,  why  we  fubftitute 
fprinkling  for  baptizing,  and  fay  unto  us,  Whence  is 
this  fubfhtution,  from  heaven,  or  of  men  ?  Would 
there  not  be  great  reafonings  among  us  what  anfwer 
Jo  return  ?  Should  we  fay,  From  heaven  5  He  might 


Serm.  V.]  of  Baptism*  Cg 

reply,  How  do  you  prove  it  ?    Should  we  fay.  Of 
men,  then  might  he  afk,  Why  do  ye  practice  it  ? 

7.  Another  confequence  is,  we  have  the  fame 
kind  of  evidence,  and  perhaps  more  of  it,  that  baptifm 
is  to  be  adminiflered  by  immerfion,  or  dipping,  or 
putting  into  water,  than  we  have  to  fupport  any 
other  gofpel  precept,  or  practice.  The  evidence 
which  we  have,  in  either  cafe,  is  the  fignification  of 
the  words  which  are  ufed  to  point  out  the  thing  to  be 
believed,  or  practiced. 

Were  it  not  for  the  influence  of  habit,  orcuftom, 
you  would  as  readily  and  naturally  conclude,  from 
the  very  words  ufed,  that  immerfion,  or  dipping,  or 
warning  the  body  in  water,  was  the  meaning  of 
baptifm,  as  that  a  religious  eating  of  bread,  and 
drinking  of  wine,  in  commemoration  of  our  dying 
Lord,  was  the  way  to  obferve  the  Lord's  fupper. 

8.  We  appear  to  be  brought  to  this  dilemma  : 
We  mud  either  embrace  the  tradition  of  the  elders, 
for  the  rule  of  one  part  of  our  practice  ;  or  we  mud 
no  more  fprinkle,  and  call  it  baptifm. 

9.  Another  confequence  is,  Thofe  who  firfl 
introduced  fprinkling  for  baptizing,  had  no  more 
right  fo  to  do,  than  they  had  to  inftitute  a  new  rite, 
or  ordinance,  and  call  it  Chrifl's. 

What  authority  have  we  to  follow  their  erroneous 
and  hurtful  practice  ? 

10.  We  have  another  confequence  worthy  of 
coufideration,  and  it  is  this :  The  chriflian  ordinance 
of  baptifm  is  a  mod  folemn  and  fignificant  ordinance, 
and  of  very  high  importance. 

I  fpeak  not  of  the  vifible,  or  actual,  adminiftration 
of  it,  in  particular  ;  for  I  never  faw  it  adminiflered, 
as  Chrift  hath  delivered  it  to  his  people.  But  I 
refer  to  the  purport,  end  and  defign  of  it.  It  is, 
among  many  other  things,  the  great  dividing  line, 


jo  The  Mode  and  Subjects       [Serm.  V* 

which  heaven  hath  appointed  to  be  drawn  between 
the  vifible  kingdom  of  Immanuel,  and  the  men  of 
this  world.  Donbtlefs  there- are  a  large  number 
who  belong  to  Chrifl's  invifible  kingdom,  who  are 
not,  ftrictly  fpeaking,  or  regularly,  in  his  kingdom 
visibly,  having  not  fubmitted  to  this  ordinance, 
which  is  the  great  and  important  line  of  diftinclion. 

ii.  It  appears  that  we  are,  truly,  in  a  trying 
flate.  We  mult  depart,  in  one  inftance,  from  a 
long  habit,  or  continue  to  do  as  we  have  done,  and 
yet  not  be  able  to  vindicate,  by  the  fcriptures  of 
truth,  our  own  conduct. 

Lastly,  We  come,  at  length,  to  the  anfwer  of  this 
old  and -difficult  and  perplexing  queftion  :  Where, 
and  when,  did  the  religious  feci:,  called  Baptifts, 
arife  ?  The  anfwer  is,  plainly,  this.  They  arofe  in 
Judea,  at  the  time  when  John  came,  preaching  in  the 
wildernefs  the  baptifm  of  repentance.  I  mention  this 
confequence  with  confiderablc  alTurance,  becaufe  the 
New  Teftament  abundantly  favors  it,  and  no  man 
is  able  to  contradict  me.  Should  any  attempt  it,  he 
will  fail  for  want  of  evidence.  I  mould,  not  long 
fince,  have  been  gratified,  could  I  have  found  their 
origin  any  where  in  the  dark  ages  of  popery,  or  at 
the  commencement  of  the  reformation,  among  the 
famous  enthuiiafts  of  Germany,  Holland,  Switzer- 
land, or  Weftphalia.  But,  after  having  long  pur* 
fued  the  perplexing  refearch,  I  found  their  origin 
where  I  lead  of  all  expected  it,  in  Enon  and  Jordan. 

A  few  queftions  are  now  to  clofe  the  prefent 
fubjecl:. 

i.  Is  not  immerfion  the  fcripture  baptifm  ? 

2.  Is  fprinkling  a  mode  of  baptizing  warranted 
by  fcripture  ?  If  fo,  where  ? 

3.  Are  Old  Teftament  rites  to  explain  New 
Teftament  ordinances  ?  Is  Mofes  to  correct  what 
Chrift  hath  left  incomplete  ?  Is  it  fo  ? 


Serm.  V.]  of  Baptism.  jx 

4.  Will  Chrift  approve  of  that  practice  of  men, 
which  fo  changes  his  pofitive  inftitution,  as  to  lofe, 
greatly  to  lofe,  the  purport,  end  and  defign  of  it  ? 

5.  Was  it  ever  right,  and  is  it  now,  for  men  to 
change  what  Chrift  hath  commanded  to  be  in  per- 
petual obfervation  ?  Did  the  fnppofed  extreme  cases 
juflify  this  change  at  flrft,  and  will  trifling  incon- 
veniences juftify  us  now  ? 

6.  Will  it  be  wife  and  fafe  for  us  continually  to 
forfake  the  commandment  of  Chrift  for  the  precepts 
of  men  ? 

7.  Do  you,  my  brethren,  or  can  you,  blame  me 
for  wifhing  you  to  keep  the  ordinances  of  Chrift  as 
he  hath  delivered  them  to  the  faints  ? 

8.  Should  I  have  manifefted  myfelf  your  friend, 
or  Chrift's,  if,  after  having  found  fuch  a  precious, 
new  and  old  treasure  in  his  word,  as  is  the  chriftian 
ordinance  of  baptifm,  I  had  not  ventured  my  life,  or 
in  other  words,  my  reputation,  my  eafe,  my  pro- 
perty, and  my  every  worldly  confideration,  to  bring 
it  forth  to  your  view  and  acceptance,  that  you  might 
more  fully  walk  in  all  the  ftatutes  and  ordinances  of 
the  Lord  blamelefs  ? 

One  requeft,  my  brethren,  I  pray  you  to  grant 
me,  and  it  is  this :  Search  the  fcriptures  devoutly, 
and  follow  me  fo  far  as  I  follow  Jefus  Chrift,  your 
Lord  and  mine. 


ji  The  Mode  and  Subjects      [Serin.  VI. 


SERMON  VI. 


MATTHEW  XXVIII.  19,  20. 

Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghoft  ; 
teaching  them  to  obferve  all  things  whatfoevcr  I  have  com- 
manded you  :  And,  lo,  I  ara  with  you  aiway,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world.     Amen. 

1  HAVE  already  obferved  to  you,  that 
Chrift  Jefus,  the  head  of  the  church,  and  Lord  of 
all,  was  now  conftituting  his  prefent  and  fucceeding 
difciples  to  be  apoftles  unto  all  nations.  My  text  is 
their  commiflion,  and  general  and  particular  orders. 
In  it  they  are  directed — 

I.  To  go  and  difciple  all  nations. 

II.  To  baptize  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  &c. 

III.  He  directs  thefe  newly  conftituted  apoftles, 
and  all  their  fucceffors,  to  teach  their  baptized  dif- 
ciples to  obferve  all  things  whatfoever  he  had  given 
in  commandment. 

Lastly ',  For  their  encouragement  and  comfort,  he 
adds,  and,  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world.  Amen. 

What  I  purpofed  to  fay  to  you,  particularly, 
upon  the  fecond  proportion,  I  have  faid.  I  now 
recur  to  the 

I.  Which  contains  Chrift's  command  to  hisdhciples 
to  go  and  disciple  all  nations. 

I  have  already  fhowed  you  what  baptifm  is,  and 
the  defign  of  it.  I  am  now,  if  the  Lord  will,  to  lay 
open  what  is  commanded  to  be  done,  before  baptifm 
be  adminiftered,  alfo  the  evidence  which  the  Lord 


Serm.  VI.]  of  Baptism.  73 

may  afford  me  to  prove  to  you  that  my  inftrncYion 
is  of  him. 

Your  feelings,  my  brethren,  and  people,  have  no 
doubt  been  highly  wrought  up,  whilfl  I  have  opened 
before  you  one  of  the  laws  of  Chrift's  kingdom 
amongfl  men.  I  have  fliil  more  things  to  fay  unto 
you,  refpecting  the  rules  and  regulations  of  this 
kingdom.  1  pray  the  Lord,  that  your  minds  may 
be  fo  prepared  to  hear,  that  you  may  not  forfake  me, 
and  flee,  as  many  of  Chrift's  profeffed  friends  did, 
when  he  preached  on  a  fubject  which  greatly  crcfled 
their  prejudices  and  carnal  expectations. 

Your  bufy  minds,  no  doubt,  will,  before  you  are 
aware,  be  enquiring  wrhat  great  and  good  men,  in 
our  days  and  in  the  days  of  our  fathers,  have  f. 
and  thought  of  thefe  things ;  but  we  ihould  look 
farther  back  than  to  cur  forefathers.  The  man 
Chrift  Jefus,  and  his  infpired  prophets  and  apoftle", 
fhould  be  the  men  of  our  counfel.  Should  1  fpeak 
according  to  thefe,  you  may  hearken  to  me  with 
fafety  ;  if  contrary,  convict  me  by  the  word  and  lef- 
timony  of  Jefus  C brill ;  for  I  appeal  to  thefe,  for  by 
them  I  ought  to  be  judged. 

One  requeft,  my  hearers,  I  pray  you  to  grant  me, 
namely — Lay  prejudice  allde,  and  let  fcripture, 
reafon  and  common  fenfe  be  heard  for  a  few  minutes. 

Surely  you  muff  coniider  my  cafe  more  trying  than 
any  of  yours.  For  it  is,  perhaps,  as  difficult  for  me 
to  combat  my  own  prejudices  and  carnal  feelings,  as 
it  is  for  any  of  you  to  contend  with  his :  Befides 
this,  I  have  to  look  your  prejudices  in  the  face, 
while  I  venture  to  bring  any  of  your  old  practices 
to  the  fcriptures  for  trial.  Yes,  more  than  all  this, 
I  have  many  trials  to  encounter,  which  you  have  not, 
nor  can  have. 


74  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Serin.  VI. 

I  jphduld  not  have  made  the  attempt  to  bring  our 
former  practice  to  the  itandard  for  trial,  had  not  my 
difficulties  been  fo  great,  that  I  durft  proceed  no 
farther,  without  proving  my  works.  One  of  my 
}  radices  hath  been  weighed  in  the  balance,  and  is 
found  wanting.  I  am  now,  if  my  heart  deceive  me 
not,  willing  to  lead  another  of  my  works,  or  the 
iubje&s  on  which  fome  of  my  works  have  been,  to 
the  bar  for  trial.  If  this  fhall  be  found  of  wood, 
hay,  or  flubble,  may  the  fire  of  truth  burn  it  up,  and 
may  the  fire  of  love  caufe  me  to  rejoice  while  it  fhall 
be  con fum in?. 

The  proportion  which  will  bring  this  other  of  my 
works  to  the  trial  is — 

Chrifl  commands  his  miniflers  to  go  and  difciple 
all  nations.      1  have  engaged    to  be  one    of  thefe 

o    o 

miniflers.  The  command  is,  therefore,  binding  upon 
me.  I  have  gone  forth,  that  I  might  obey.  The 
great  thing  to  be  determined  is,  whethe^fl  have 
underftood  what  it  is  to  difciple,  or  to  make  difciples, 
and  have  practiced  accordingly. 

The  important  queftion  to  be  decided  is  juft  this : 
If  I  difciple  any  of  you,  who  are  parents,  do  I,  as  a 
necefTary  confequence,  difciple  all  your  children  and 
houfeholds  ? 

The  only  difficulty,  in  this  queftion,  relates  tc* 
children  and  houfeholds.  What  it  is  to  difciple  the 
mailer  of  a  family,  is  a  thing  in  which  chriftians 
generally  agree. 

I  ought  jufl  to  remark  to  you,  that  tnatheteusate 
to  teach,  is,  in  its  literal  and  genuine  fenfe,  to  dif- 
ciple, or  {o  teach  as  to  make  difciples. 

To  bring  the  queftion  before  you  as  fully  as  I  can, 
I  wifti  you,  each  one  of  you,  to  fix  his  attention 
upon  fome  one  family  in  this  town,  in  which  family 


Semi.  VI.]  of  Baptism*  7$ 

not  a  chriftian  is  to  be  found.  If  each  one  have  his 
mind  fixed  upon  fuch  a  Chriftlefs  houfehold,  I  will 
now  put  the  queftion  : — 

Suppofe  I,  inftftimentally,  difciple  the  father  of 
this  family,  do  I,  as  a  certain  confequence,  make 
difciples  of  the  whole  family  ? 

Before  you  determine  the  queftion,  it  may  be  well 
to  fix  in  your  minds  what  a  difciple  Is.  Let  the 
fcriptures  fpeak.  The  disciples  were  called  chriftians 
firft  at  Antioch  :  Acts  si.  26.  The  com  million  which 
Chrift  gave  to  the  fir  ft  minifters,  and  to  all  fucceed- 
ing  ones,  as  recorded  Mark  xvi.  15,  16",  is,  Go  ye 
into  all  the  world,  and  preach  the  gofpel  to  every 
creature;  fee  that  bdlz^eth^  £r.c.  Here  a  bcllcvr;  ^ 
the  fame  as  a  disciple.  Here  we  fee",  a  difciple,  in 
the  ieni'e  of  my  text,  is  a  believer,  a  believer  inChritl, 
a  chriftian.  This  is  theidea  which  the  New  Tefta- 
ment,  from  beginning  to  end,  gives  us  of  a  difciple. 
There  is,  however,  mention  made  of  difciples,  who 
were  fo  but  by  profeffion,  or  who  were  vifible 
difciples  only  ;  not  having  the  love  of  God  in  them. 

Now  try  the  queftion  with  refpect  to  both  forts  of 
thefe  difciples. 

Suppofe  I,  inftrumentally,  difciple  the  father  of  a 
Chriftlefs  family,  do  I  as  a  neceffary  confequence, 
make  chriftians  of  all  his  houfe  ?  You  will  pleafe  to 
make  up  your  minds,  on  this  queftion,  decidedly. 

Suppofe,  again,  that  I,  inftrumentally,  difciple  Hie 
father  of  a  Chriftlefs  family,  do  I,  as  a  neceffary 
confequence,  make  visible  difciples  of  all  his  family? 
Let  your  minds  be  clearly  determined  as  to  the 
anfwer. 

Once  more,  fuppofe  I,  by  delivering  the  Lord's 
meflage,  convert,  or  make  a  difciple  of  "the  father  of 
a  Chriftlefs  family,  do  I,  of  neceilary  confequence, 


7 0  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Serm.  VI. 

make  any  one  of  his  houfehold  befidcs  himfelf  a 
difciple*? 

Let  fcripture,  let  reafon,  let  common  fenfe,  let  any 
thing,  fpeak,  which  will  (peak  the  truth,  and  deter- 
mine iheie  queftions.  Confider,  take  advice,  and 
fpeak  your  minds. 

Can  you  fuppofe,  or  can  you  not,  that  to  make  a 
father  of  a  family  a  difciple,  his  wife,  his  fervants, 
and  his  children,  are  all  difciples  of  courfe,  or  of 
neceflary  confeqnence  ? 

Is  not  this  a  clear  cafe  ?  and  yet  the  great  and 
momentous  fuhjecr.  before  us  turns,  altogether,  upon 
the  anfwer  of  this  queftion. 

I;:  ctifciniiag  the  father  of  a  family  renders  all  his 
houfe  difciples,  they  are  all  fubjecls  of  baptiim,  they 
have  the  fcripture  qualification  for  it  ;  if  it  do  not, 
then  they  have  not  the  qualification  which  my  text 
requires  to  be  in  thofe  who  are  baptized. 

You  will  judge  for  yourfelves  whether  houfeholds 
do  thus  become  difciples  ;  as  for  the  reft,  the  fcrip- 
tures  determine  :  if  they  be  difciples,  they  are  to  be 
baptized  ;  if  not,  they  are  not  to  be. 

I  know  what  your  anfwer  mull  be,  for  by  incon- 
teitible  fa&s,  in  this  town,  the  difcipling  of  a  father 
of  a  family  does  not  difciple  his  houfehold  ;  it  does 
not  even  make  them  vifible  difciples,  or  give  them 
even  the  appearance  of  being  fo. 

The  following  is  for  evidence,  that  perfons  mud 
be  made  difciples,  before  they  are  baptized. 

i.  John  made  his  hearers  difciples  before  he 
baptized  them.  He  required,  in  order  for  baptifm, 
that  they  fliould  bring  forth  fruits  meet  for,  or  as 
evidence  of,  repentance  :  Mat.  iii.  8,  and  Luke  iii.  8. 

*  Prejudice  nay  reply,  You  are  to  difciple  the  houfehold  by 
baptizing  them.  This  contradicts  my  text,  that  fays,  difciple 
them  fir  it. 


Serm.  VI.]  of  Baptism.  yy 

2.  Chriii's  difciples  baptized  none  but  inch  as 
were  made  difciples  firfl :  John  iv.  i,  2. 

3.  Chrift,  in  my  text,  gives  no  liberty  to  baptize 
any  bat  fuch  as  are  firfl:  difcipled.  Yes,  he  com- 
mands his  minifters  to  difciple  before  they  baptize. 

The  account  which  Mark  gives  us  of  the  apoftles* 
eomraiffion,  and  of  the  Baptifoial  Infcitution,  is  con- 
firming evidence  in  this  matter  :  xvith  chapt.  15th 
and  16th  verfes :  'Preach  the  gofpel  to  every 
creature  :  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized,'  &c. 
Here,  believing  is  put  before  baptifm.  The  way 
adopted  by  fome  to  avoid  the  force  of  this  text  is, 
if  they  be  baptized,  fay  they,  no  matter  when,  before 
or  after  believing.  This  way  of  getting  clear  of  the 
difficulty  appears  neither  wife  nor  candid  ;  for  it 
injures  the  plain  meaning  of  the  text,  and  makes 
Matthew's  and  Mark's  account  of  the  com  million  to 
difagree. 

What  remains  are  a  number  of  plain  truths,  fa&s 
and  confequences,  which  have  a  more  near  or  remote 
relation  with  the  fubject  on  hand,  and  may  ferve  to 
throw  light  upon  it. 

In  the  Firs  r  place,  we  may  take  notice  of  two 
particulars,  which, perhaps,  havenot  been  fufficiently 
noticed. 

One  is,  the  ceremonial  law,  and  the  covenant  of 
circumcifion  which  was  annexed  to  it,  appear  to  be 
difannullcd  and  pad  away. 

The  following  may  make  this  matter  plain  :  The 
difannulling  or  abolilhing  of  the  law,  we  fee,  Heb. 
vii.  18.  '  There  is  verily  a  difannulling  of  the  com- 
mandment going  before,  for  the  weaknefs  and 
unpromablenefs  thereof.'  Alfo,Gal.  iii  19.  'Where- 
foic  then  ferveth  the  law  ?  It  was  added  becaufe  of 
tranfgreffions,  till  the  seed  mould  come,  to  wh,m  the 
promise  was  made.'    What  feed  this  is,  to  whom  the 

H  2 


;o  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Serm.  VI. 

pfromrfe  was  made,  we  are  told  in  the  16th  verfe  of 
the  lame  chapter  :  "  Now  to  Abraham  and  his  feed 
were  the  promifes  made :  He  faith  not  to  feeds,  as 
6f  many  ;  but  as  of  one,  And  to  thy  feed,  which  is 
C  brill."  We  hence  lee,  that  Chriil  was  the  feed  to 
v.hom  the  promifes  were  made,  and  that  the  lazu 
(the  ceremonial  law)  was  added  becaufe  of  tranf- 
greilions,  till  the  feed,  i.  e.  Chriil:,  fhould  come.  It 
is  hence  plain,  that  the  ceremonial  law  was  to 
continue  no  longer  than  till  Chriil:  came. 

The  covenant  cf  circumcifion  appears  fo  be 
annexed  to  this  law.  For  fays  Jefus  Chriil,  John 
vii.  2?,  If  a  man  on  the  fabbath  dav  receive  circum- 
cision,  that  the  law  of  Moses  ihould  not  be  broken, 
are  ye  angry  at  me  ?  &c. 

That  this  covenant  of  circumcifion,  or  the  Sinai 
covenant,  which  includes  it,  hath  paiTed  away,  or  is 
difan nulled,  fee  Heb.  viii.  13.  *  In  that  he  faith  jl 
new  covenant,  he  hath  made  the  firft  old  :  now  that 
which  decay eth  and  waxeth  old  is  ready  to  vanifli 
away.' 

Bcfides,  circumcifion  is,  evidently,  a  very  import- 
ant part  of  that  law,  which  is  disannulled  ;  for  faith 
Fa  til  to  the  Galatians,  chapter  v.  2,  3,  If  ye  be  r/r- 
cumcised  Chriil  fhall  profit  you  nothing.  For  I  teftify 
again,  lays  he,  to  every  man  that  h  circumcised,  that 
he  is  a  debtor  to  do  the  whole  law. 

It  is  hence  plain,  that  the  ceremonial  law  is  no 
longer  binding  ;  and  that  the  covenant  of  circum- 
cifion, which  was  incorporated  with  it,  hath  vaniihed  j 

away. 

The  other  particular  is  this  :  the  promifes,  which 
were  made  to  Abraham  and  his  feed,  were  not  made 
to  him  in  circumcision,  but  in  unci  r  cum  cision  ;  and 
the  covenant  which  was  confirmed  or  God,  to 
a  ]>  -n  h-vr}  ;'n  ChrPl-^  v:v3  while  he  was  i  n  iwrircwiicisicn, 

******     J    .  r"  * 


Serm.  VI.]  of  Baptism.  79 

and  about  twenty-four  years  before  the  covenant^oi 
circumcision  was  given.  Rom.  iv.  8,  9,  10. — Gal. 
iii.  16,  17. — Gen.  xii.  3,  4.  7,  and  xvii.  10.  17. 

Moreover,  When  Paul  fpeajts.  of  the  covenant 
which  was  confirmed  of  God  in  Chrifc,  he  points  out 
the  exact  vear,  when  this  was  made  known,  or  con- 
firmed v\ith  Abraham,  as  though  he  had  aforefight, 
as  certainly  the  Holy  Ghoir  had,  of  the  contention 
Which  fhould  be  long  continued,  for  want  of  judi- 
cioufly  underlranding  what  covenant  fhould  be  dis- 
annulled, and  what  covenant  the  law  could  not 
difannul.  He  tells  us,  Gal.  iii.  1 7,  That  this  covenant, 
which  cannot  be  made  void,  was  four  hundred  and 
thirty  years  before  the  law  :  whereas  the  covenant 
of  circumcifion  was  about  four  hundred  and  fix 
years  before  the  law,  with  which  circumcifion  was* 
united.. 

Seeing  matters  are  thus,  what,  I  pray  you,  my 
hearers,  have  we  to  do  wirh  the  covenant  of  circum- 
cifion ?  If  we  keep  it,  Chrift  (hall  profit  us  nothing  : 
if  wc  obferve  fomething  which  we  fubftitute  in  its 
place,  Chrill  may  profit  us  as  little  in  fu  h  obfervance. 

I  know  it  will  be  all  ed,  Is  not  the  church  the 
fame  now,  that  it  was  in  Abraham's  day  ?  I  an  fiver, 
yes,  and  the  fame  that  it  was  in  Noah's,  Enoch's 
and  Adam's,  and  the  fame  that  it  ever  will  be.  It 
will  be  aiked  again,  is  not  the  covenant  the  fame, 
which  it  was  in  Abraham's  time  ?  Yes,  ihc  covenant 
which  was  confirmed  of  God  in  Chrifl  i;  unchangea- 
bly the  fame  ;  but  the  covenant  of  circumcifion, 
which  God  made  with  Abraham,  renewed  with 
faac  and  Jacob,  and  folemnized  with  Ifrael  in  the 
ildernefs,  (Deut.  xxix.  10,  11,  12,  13)  is  far  from 
being  the  covenant,  the  new  covenant,  which  God 
makes  with  the  houfe  of  Ifrael  in  our  day.  J  he 
covenant  cf  circuraciiion  was,  more  than  leventeeti 


8a  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Serm.  VI. 

hundred  years  ago,  decaying,  waxing  old,  and  ready: 
to  vaniih  away.  But  you  will  again  fay,  is  not  the 
church  compofed  of  parents  and  children,  and  of 
houfeholds,  now,  as  it  was  in  Abraham's  day  ?  Let 
Paul  anfwer  how  it  was  (as  touching  the  gofpel)  in 
Abraham's  day  and  after.  Rom.  ix.  6,  7,  8.  'They 
are  not  all  Ifrael  which  are  of  Ifrael,  neither,  becaufe 
they  are  the  (ccd  of  Abraham,  are  they  all  children  : 
but  in  Ifaac  (hall  thy  feed  be  called.'  That  is,  they 
that  are  the  children  of  the  flrlh,  thefe  are  not  the 
children  of  God  :  but  the  children  of  the  pro-mfe 
are  counted  for  the  feed.  Juit  fo  now.  The  children 
of  God,  the  children  of  the  promife,  are  counted 
for  the  (ccd,  and  compofe  the  church  ;  and  of  thofe 
who  appear  thus  ihould  the  vilible  church  be  made 
up,  and  of  none  elfe  But,  if  bv  the  queition  be 
meant,  Doss  not  church  memberfhip  defcend  from 
parents  to  children,  and  from  mailers  toftrvants,  as 
it  appears  to  have  done  under  the  old  covenant  of 
circumcifioii  ?  the  answer  is,  The  New  Teitament 
no  where  acknowledges,  nor  does  it  know,  anv  thing 
about  a  church  thus  made  up.  1  would  that  all 
go -.id  men  would  con  fen  t  to  take  New  Teitament 
directions  and  examples  by  which  to  conftitute  and 
guide  New  Teftament  churches. 

But  it  will  be  aiked  once  more,  Hath  not  baptiftn 
.come  into  the  place  of  circumcifion,  and  to  be  applied 
to  fi  nilar  fubjecls  ?  dnswer,  Circumcifion  was  a 
pofuive  inilitution,  and  fo  is  baptifm.  Abraham 
and  thelfraelifes  knew  nothing  to  whom  circumcifion, 
fhould  be  adminiftered,  but  as  they  received  direction 
from  the  Divine  Inftitutor ;  juit  fo  it  is  with  refpeer. 
to  the  adminiftralion  of  baptifm.  The  chriitians  at 
Antioch,  the  elders  at  Jerufalem,  the  church  of 
G  ilcitn,  and  Paul  and  Barnabas,  knew  nothing  of 
baptifm  being  fubitituted  for  circuinciiion.  A£b  xv. 


Scrm.  VI.]  of  Baptism.  8 1 

i  to  35  j  Gal.  iii.  and  v.  chapters.  We  know- 
nothing,  and  can  know  nothing",  as  to  whom  baptifm 
is  to  be  adminiftered,  but  from  what  Chrift  hath 
told  us  as  to  the  fubjecls.         Now — 

Secondly,  I  afk  what  evidence  have  we  from  the 
Bible  that  infants  are  to  be  baptized  ? 

You  may  reply,  they  are  included  in  the  covenant. 
What  covenant  ?  In  that  of  circumcificn  ?  Surely 
not,  for  that  hath  vanifhed  away.  If  you  fay,  in 
the  covenant  that  was  confirmed  of  God  in  Chrift, 
I  answer,  it  was  not  this  covenant  which  entitled 
Abraham's  houfehold  to  circumcifion,  therefore, 
though  your  children  be  in  this  covenant,  that  does 
not,  of  itfelf,  entitle  them  to  baptifm  ;  whether  bap* 
tifm  be  in  the  place  of  circumcifion,  or  not.  You 
will  then  fay,  What  can  entitle  our  children,  to 
baptifm  ?  Answer^  Their  being  difciples,  and  fa 
coming  within  the  compafs,  or  pale,  of  the  baptifmal 
inflitution. 

As  we  can  know  nothing  of  the  fubje&s  of  baptifm, 
any  more  than  Abraham  and  Ifrael  could  of  the  fub- 
je&s  of  circumcifion,  but  from  what  we  are  informed 
in  the  inflitution,  and  in  what  is  faid  upon  it,  we  will 
inquire  what  the  Bible  faith  of  this  matter. 

If  the  Lord,  in  his  word,  hath  not  given  us  fufR- 
cient  inftruction  upon  this  fubject,  we  mult  practice 
in  the  dark,  for  we  have  no  where  elfe  to  go. 

We  will  begin  with  John.  i.  Did  he  baptize 
any  children  ?  We  have  no  evidence  that  he  did. 
Befides,  he  told  the  multitude,  which  attended  his 
miniftry,  not  to  plead  Abraham,  or  Abraham's 
covenant,  as  a  title  to  baptifm.  Matth.  iii.  7,  8,  9,  ic. 

2.  Did  Chrift's  difciples,  whilil  he  was  with  them, 
and  whilil:  they  made  and  baptized  more  disciples  than 
John,  baptize  infants,  or  any  vifibly  unbelieving 
children  ?  No  evidence  that  they  did. 


$2  The  Mode  and  Subjects         [Serm.  VI. 

^.  h  there  any  evidence  from  my  text,  which 
contains  the  words  of  the  inftitution,  that  infants, 
or  unbelieving  households,  were  to  be  baptized  ? 
None  :   but  the  contrary. 

4.  Is  there  any  paifage  in  the  New  Tedamenf, 
which  commands,  or  fays  fo  much  as  one  word,  that 
infants  are  to  be  baptized  ?  Not  one. 

5.  Is  there  any  example,  which  fhows,  that  the 
apoftles  baptized  any  upon  the  faith  of  parents,  or 
mafters,  or  upon  the  faith,  or  promifes,  of  any 
others? 

I  know,  rny  brethren,  there  are  three  inftances, 
which  are  ^uppofed,  by  fome,  to  favor  the  affirma- 
tive of  the  queftion.  I  have  rather  been  of  the 
fame  opinion.       If  it  be  fo,  may  facts  convince  u-. 

"We  will  look  at  each  of  thefe  examples  feparately. 

The  firit  fuppofed  example  we  find  at  Philippi. 
Here  was  a  woman,  named  Lydia  ;  fhe  appears  to 
have  been  a  woman  of  bufinefs.  She  belonged  to 
Thyatira,  but  was  now  at  Philippi,  probably  felling 
her  merchandife,  with  feveral  attendants.  The 
hiitory  is  thus  related,  A&s  xvi.  13th,  14th,  and 
15th  verfes.  "  On  the  fabbath  day,  we  (Paul  and 
other  difciples)  went  out  of  the  city,  by  a  river  fide, 
where  prayer  was  wont  to  be  made,  and  we  fat 
down,  and  fpake  unto  the  women  that  reforted 
thither.  And  a  certain  woman,  named  Lydia,  a 
feller  of  purple,  of  the  city  of  Thyatira,  who  wor- 
fhipped  God,  heml  us,  whofe  heart  the  Lord  opened, 
that  flie  attended  unto  the  things  which  were  fpoken 
of  Paul.  And  when  (lie  was  baptized  and  her  houfe- 
hold  ihe  befought  us,  faying,  If  ye  have  judged  me 
to  be  faithful  to  the  Lord,  coTnc  into  my  houfe  and 
abide  there.''  .426. 

This  is  all  we  know  of  tl\e  tnatter.  She  belonged 
to  another  city.     She  worihipped  God.     She  was, 


Serm.VL]  of  Baptism.  8$ 

on  the  fabbath  day,  by  the  fide  of  a  river,  where 
prayer  was  wont  to  be  made.  The  Lord  opened 
her  heart  to  attcc  )  o  what  Paul  faid.  Her  fervants 
•were  with  her.  She  had  a  houfe,  either  her  own, 
or  one  taken  for  the  time.  She  was  baptized,  and 
her  houfehold.  As  to  her  having  infants  with  her, 
you  can  tell,  as  well  as  I.  Moreover,  whether  her 
fervants  believed  the  words  of  Paul,  you  can,  if  you 
attend  to  the  circumftances,  form  as  correct  a  judg- 
ment, perhaps,  as  any  other  can  make  up  for  you. 

The  things  to  be  conlldered  are,  i.  Lydia  was  a 
godly  woman.  2.  She  attended  meeting.  Paul 
found  her  where  prayer  was  wont  to  be  made,  where 
religious  women  had  been  accuftomed  to  meet.  3. 
She,  like  other  religious  people,  took  her  houfehold 
to  meeting  with  her.  4.  It  appears  that  Paul  bap- 
tized none  of  her  houfehold,  but  fuch  as  were  with 
her  at  the  female  praying  meeting.  5.  The  flrong 
probability  is,  that  Lydia,  being  a  pious  woman,  one 
"■vho  worshipped  God,  'would  (elect,  for  her  atten- 
tats, maidens  or  fervants  who  alfo  were  worfhippers 
of  God.  In  verfe  40,  we  are  told,  the  apoftles 
entered  into  the  houfe  of  Lydia,  comforted  the 
brethren,  &c.  You  will  weigh  thefe  circumftances, 
and  make  up  for  yourlelves,  fo  far  as  you  can,  a 
righteous  judgment. 

The  next  example  is  recorded  in  the  fame  chapter, 
and  appears  to  be  in  the  fame  city.  The  hiftory  of 
the  matter  is  contained  in  the  2j5t.l1  verfe,  and  to  the 
34th.  The  noticeable  fach,and  on  which  we  mull 
make  up  our  judgment,  are — The  jailor  fays,  Sirs, 
What  muft  1  do  to  be  faved  ?  Paul  and  Silas  an- 
fwered,  Believe  on  the  Lord  Jefus  Chrift,  and  fhou 
fhalt  be  faved,  and  dry  houfe.  And  they  fpake  unto 
him  the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  to  all  that  were  in 
his  houfe.     And  he  was  baptized,  he. and  all  Ms, 


$4  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Serin.  VI. 

ftraiditway — and  rejoiced,  believing  in  God  with  ail 
his  houfe. 

Mere  are  three  things  to  be  put  together.  i.The 
word  of  the  Lord  Jems  wasfpoken  to  them  all.  2. 
They  were  all  baptized.  3.  They  all  believed  in 
God.  Whether  here  be  any  example  of  infant 
baptifm,  you  will  judge,  each  one  forhimfelf. 

As  fome  have  fuppofed  that  this  pafTage,  and  a  few 
oihers  of  fimilar  import,  afford  an  argument  in  favor 
of  fprinkling,  it  may  be  well  to  give  it  a  moment's 
consideration.  Here  we  are  told,  that  the  keeper  of 
the  prifon  brought  out  Paul  and  Silas.  Where  he 
brought  them  to  feems  plainly  enough  to  be  gathered 
from  the  3 2d  verfe,  in  which  we  find  them  {peaking 
to  the  jailor  the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  to  all  that 
were  in  his  houfe.  In  the  next  verfe  we  are  informed 
that  the  jailor  and  all  his  were  baptized.  Where 
they  were  baptized,  we  are  not  told.  One  thing 
however  is  plain,  it  was  not  in  the  houfe,  for  in  verfe 
34  it  is  faid,  When  (i.  e.  after  the  houfehold  wero 
baptized)  he  had  brought  them  into  his  houfe,  i£* 
fet  meat  before  them,  and  rejoiced,  believing  in  God, 
with  all  his  houfe.  From  thefe  obfervations,  the 
following  things  appear : — 

1.  That  Paul  and  Silas  were  in  the  jailor's  houfe, 
when  they  fpake  the  word  of  the  Lord  to  all  that 
were  in  his  houfe.  2.  That  when  the  ordinance  of 
baptifm  was  adminiftered,  they  were  not  in  his  houfe. 

3.  That  the  mode  of  baptizing  then  in  ufe  rendered 
it  inconvenient  to  be  performed  in  the  jailor's  houfe. 

4.  After  the  ordinance  was  adminiftered,  they  went 
kito  the  houfe.   Mow  this  favors  fprinkling  1  fee  not. 

The  other  fuppofed  example  is  in  1  Cor.  i.  16, 
where  Paul  fays,  I  baptized  alio  the  houfehold  of 
Strphanas.  In  the  xvith  chap.  15th  verfe,  we  have 
a  fhort  hiftory  of  Steplianas's  houfehold  ;  it  is  thus, 


Serm.  VI]  of  Baptism.  85 

"  Ye  know  the  houfehold  of  Stephanas,  that  it  is  the 
firft  fruits  of  Acbaia,  and  that  they  have  addicted 
themfelves  to  the  minifhy  of  the  faints."  Whether 
there  is  here  found  any  evidence  of  infantbaptifm,you 
■will  determine  for  yourfelves. 

6.  Are  the  encouragements  which  are  given  to« 
parents,  in  behalf  of  their  children,  made  to  their 
having  them  baptized;  or  are  the  bleffings  connected 
with  their  dedicating  them  to  the  -Lord,  and  with 
their  bringing  them  up 'in  his  nurture  and  admonition  ? 
With  which,  your  Bibles  will  inform  yon. 

7.  Do  we,  or  do  any,  pretend,  that  there  is  any 
certain  evidence,  from  either  precept  or  example, 
for  the  baptizing  of  infants  ?  Indeed  there  is  none. 
Probably  not  many  fuppofe  it. 

8.  Is  there,  as  fome  have  affirmed,  the  fame 
evidence  for  baptizing  infants,  that  there  is  for 
obferving  the  Lord's  day,  for  admitting  females  to 
communion,  and  which  there  is  for  family  prayer  ? 

There  is  a  day  called  the  Lord's  day,  and  religious 
things  were  to  be  obferved.on  it.  Are  there  infants, 
who  are  called  baptized  infants,  and  are  they  ta  be 
attended  to  as  fuch  ? 

Females  and  males  are  declared  to  be  all  one  in 
Chrift,  and  fo  fit  fubjecls  for  the  communion  of  faints, 
Are  infants  unequivocally  declared  to  be  lit  fubje&s 
of  baptifm  ? 

We  have  examples  of  family  prayer,  and  are 
commanded  to  pray  with  all  prayer.  Are  there 
fcripture  examples  of  infant  baptifm,  and  are  we 
commanded  to  baptize  all  ;  and  fo  are  infant: 
included  ? 

9.  Ought  I  to  teach  you  infant  baptifm*  if  our 
Lord  Jefus  Chrift  hath  no  where  direftcil  me  to  do 
thus  ? 


86  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Scrra.  VI. 

10.  Hath  Jefus  Chrift  fpoken  one  word  of  baptifm 
as  being  fubftituted  for  cireumcifion  ?  Hath  he  any 
where  commanded  his  miniilers  to  teach  this  fubfti- 
tution  ? 

Thirdly^  Shall  we  go,  and  are  we  under  the 
neceiiity  of  going,  to  the  taw  and  covenant  of  eir- 
cumcifion  to  prove  infant  baptifm,  when  both  this 
law  and  covenant  have  Jong  iince  waxed  old,  been 
repealed,  and  have  perifhed  ?  Heb.  vii.  i8,  19,  and 
viii.  13. 

But  you  will  aik,  Are  not  the  bleflings  of  Abra- 
ham come  on  the  Gentiles?  Ans.  Yes.  You  will 
then  fay,  Are  not  our  children  included  in  the 
promife  ?  Am.  If  they  be  Chrift's,  then  are  they 
Abraham's  feed,  and  heirs  according  to  the  promife. 
Gal.  iii.  29.  Abraham's  children,  after  the  flcih, 
were  not  included  in  the  promife,  as  the  Paedobap- 
tiib  of  our  day  would  have  theirs.  But  you  will 
fay  again,  Are  not  our  children  included  in  the 
covenant  ?  In  what  covenant  ?  In  that  of  circum- 
cifion  ?  Surely  not.  For  though  that  covenant  was 
often  renewed,  yet  it  hath  long  fmce  palled  away. 
Is  your  queftion  this  ?  Are  they  not  included  in  that 
covenant,  which  was  confirmed  of  God  in  Chrift, 
twenty-four  years  previoufly  to  the  covenant  of  cir- 
cumeifton  ?  I  anfwer,  No  man  knoweth,  nor  can 
know,  but  as  your  children  give  evidence,  that  they 
poiTef:  the  Spirit  of  Chrift.  But  as  I  have  obferved 
to  you  before,  fo  I  fay  again,  even  were  your  chil- 
dren included  in  this  covenant,  and  faints  ;  this  does 
not  of  itfelf  give  them  any  right  to  baptifm,  any 
more,  than  Abraham's  being  included  in  the  fame 
covenant  gave  him  a  right  to  cireumcifion.  This 
covenant  determines  nothing  as  to  the  one.  or  the 
other.  The  covenant  of  cireumcifion  determined 
who  were  to  be  circumcifed.     So  the  ordinance  or 


Serin.  VI.]  ifWpthm  87 

inflitution  of  baptifm,  determines  who  are  to  be 
baptized.  One  determines  no  more  who  are  to  be 
admitted  to  the  other,  than  does  the  covenant  of  an 
everlafting  prieflhood  (Numb.  xxv.  13)  determine 
who  mall  be  mini  tiers  in  gofpel  days.  In  fhort, 
there  is  no  arguing  from  one  to  the  other  in  this 
matter.  They  are  both  of  them  pofitive  inftitutions, 
and  nothing  can  be  known  of  either,  but  what  is 
revealed  in  its  particular  inflitution* 

While  viewing  this  fubject  you  will  inquire,  What 

will  become  of  our  children  ?  I  anfwer,   God  only 

-    knoweth.      You  may  rejoin  :   But  what  {hall  we  do 

for  them  ?  Ans.  Dedicate  them  to  God,  and,  like 

faithful  chriflians,  bring  them  up  for  him. 

Fourthly,  We  will  now  attend  to  fome  legitimate 
coulequences  which  follow,  upon  fuppofition  that  the 
fubjecis  of  baptifm  are  to  be  determined  from  the 
.   fubjects  of  circumcillon. 

j.  One  confequence  is,  every  man  who  is  con- 
verted to  the  chriftian  religion  is  to  be  baptized,  and 
all  his  houfehold,  though  he  may  have  three  hun- 
dred and  feventeen  training  foldiers  born  in  his  own 
houfe.  Not  only  are  thefe  foldiers  to  be  baptized, 
but  their  wives,  children,  and  all  other  fervants,  who 
belong  to  this  great  man's  houfe.  A  thoufand 
infijels  are  to  be  baptized,  becaufe  one  great  man, 
their  matter,  is  chriftianized. 

2.  Thefe  foldiers,  with  their  wives,  children  and 
fervants,  are  all  to  be  confidered  and  treated  as 
church  members,  or  a  being  in  covenant.  I  confefs 
this  does  not  look  to  me  gofpel-Iike. 

3.  Another  confequence  is,  the  adults  among 
thefe,  and  among  all  others,  who  are  baptized,  are 
not  only  to  be  admitted  to  the  communion,  but 
required  to  come.  1  all:,  could  fuch  a  communion 
be  called  the  communion  of  faints  ? — one  great  and 
P'ood  man.  with  hundreds  of  unconverted  fervants. 


&8  The  Mode  and  Subjects        [Serm.  VI. 

4.  All  who  have  been  baptized,  and  have  not,  for 
rnifdemeanor,  been  expelled  the  church,  have  a  right 
10  baptifm  for  their  children  :  and  no  man  may 
forbid  them. 

5.  Another  confequence  is,  notwithftanding 
Chrift  faith,  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world  ;  yet 
the  regulations  were  fuch,  efpecially  the  mean  of 
ad  million  into  it,  as  ftrongly,  and  of  infallible  conff- 
qwence,  tended  to  make  it  of  this  world,  and  that 
.abundantly  fo. 

6.  Another  confequence  is,  many  learned  and 
pious  miniiters  of  New  England  are  inconfiftent  with 
ihefiifely.es,  in  requiring  of  perfonsbaptizedin  infancy 
a  profeffion  of  experimental  religion,  as  a  term  of 
communion.     It  was  not  fo  done  in  Ifrael. 

7.  Another  confequence  is,  many  of  the  fame  pious 
and  learned  miniflers  are  very  inconfiftent  with 
themfelves,  in  refuiing  baptifm  to  the  children  of 
fuch  as  are,  by  their  baptifm,  in  regular  church 
memberiliip,  or  in  covenant,  as  it  is  termed. 

I  have  taken,  as  you  obferve,  for  granted,  what 
I  d^  not  believe  to  be  true,  that  fprinkling,  or  a  very 
partial  wafhing,  is  baptifm. 

Lastly,  Another  confequence  is,  it  doth,  fo  far  as 
it  hath  its  perfect  work,  deftroy  the  very  idea  of  the 
gofpel  church,  contradict  the  prophets,  and  make 
Paul,  and  others,  fpeak  not  the  truth,  and  it  throws 
us  back  to  the  ftate  of  the  Jcwiili  church. 

Jeremiah,  prophefying  of  the  gofpel  church,  faith, 
chap.  xxxi.  31  to  34,  Behold  the  days  come,  faith 
the  Lord,  that  1  will  make  a  new  covenant  with"* 
the  houfe  of  Ifrael,  and  with  the  houfe  of  Judah  ; 
not  according  to  the  covenant  that  I  made  with  your 
tafchers,  in  the  day  that  I  took  them  by  the  hand  to 
bring  them  out  of  the  laud  of  Egypt ; — But  this 
{hall  be  the  covenant  that  I  will  make  with    the 


Serm.  VI.]  of  Baptism.  89 

houfe  of  Ifrael,  after  thofe  days,  faith  the  Lord  ;  I 
will  put  my  law  in  thdf  inward  parts,  and  write  it 
in  their  hearts ;  and  will  be  their  God,  and  they 
(hall  be  my  people.  And  they  (hall  teach  no  more 
every  man  his  neighbour,  and  every  man  his  brother, 
faying,  know  the  Lord,  for  they  (hall  all  know  me, 
from  the  lead  of  them,  unto  the  greatcft  of  them, 
faith  the  Lord. 

If  this  means  any  thing,  it  certainly  means  that  the 
gofpel  church  (hall  exceed  jn  purity  the  Jewifli 
church  ;  that  it  mail,  at  lead,  be  compofed  of  pro- 
feiling  faints.  lfaiah  fays,  chap.  liv.  13,  All  thy 
children  ihall  be  taught  of  the  Lord.  The  latter  of 
thefe  pafTages,  our  Lord  applies  to  the  gofpel  day, 
John  vi.  45  :  The  former  is  applied  to  the  gofpel 
church  by  Paul,  Heb.  viii.  chap. 

Mofes  fays  in  Deut.  xviii.  15,  19.  The  Lord  thy 
God  will  raife  up  unto  thee  a  prophet  from  the  midft 
of  thee,  of  thy  brethren,  like  unto  me  ;  unto  him  ye 
ihall  hearken.  And  it  (hall  come  to  pafs,  that  who- 
foever  will  not  hearken  unto  my  words,  which  he 
fhall  fpeak  in  my  name,  I  will  require  it  of  him. 

This,  and  much  more,  Peter  applies  to  gofpel  days, 
and  to  the  gofpel  church,  Acls  iii.  22,  to  the  end. 
Mofes  truly  laid  unto  the  fathers,  A  prophet  (hall 
the  Lord  your  God  raife  up  unto  you,  of  your 
brethren,  like  unto  me  ;  him  (hall  ye  hear  in  all 
things  whatfoever  he  (hall  fay  unto  you.  And  it 
rfhall  come  to  pafs  that  every  foul  that  will  not  hear 
that  prophet,  (hall  be  destroyed  from  among  the  people* 
Yea,  and  all  the  prophets,  from  Samuel  and  thofe 
that  follow  after,  as  many  as  have  fpoken,  have  like- 
wife  foreiold  of  thefe  days.  Ye  are  the  children  of 
the  prophets,  and  of  the  covenant  which  God  made 
with  our  fathers,  faying  unto  Abraham,  And  in  thy 
feed  (hall  all  the  kindreds  of  the  earth  be  bkffed. 

1  2 


go  The  Mode  and  Subjects      [Serm.  VI. 

Unto  youfhfl:,  God,  having  railed  up  his  fon  Jefus, 
fent  him  to  blefs  you  in  turning  away  every  one  of 
you  frcm  his  iniquities. 

Through  the  New  Teftament,  the  gofpel  church 
is,  or  appears  to  be,  fpoken  of  as  a  fociety,  nation 
or  church  of  faints  ;  and  as  being  greatly  different 
from  the  nation  of  the  Jews.  But  the  fubjecls  of 
baptifm  being  determined  by  the  fubjects  of  circum- 
cifion  brings  the  gofpel  church  as  to  its  conftituent 
materials,  to  the  fame  condition  with  the  church 
under  the  law  of  carnal  ordinances.  Indeed,  what 
Is  now,  generally,  called  the  gofpel  church  is  hardly 
to  be  didinguiihed  by  its  members  from  the  old 
Jewifti  church. 

Do  not  thefe  things  look  as  though  the  twelve 
hundred  and  fixfy  years  of  antichriiVs  reign  were  not 
wholly  pad  ?  Is  there  not,  my  brethren,  fome  defiling 
error  at  the  root  of  all  this  ?  Can  fuch  dreams  as  are 
thefe  confequenc.es,  flow  from  a  pure  fountain  ? 
Indeed  many  good  minifters  of  our  land  have  long 
fince  djfeovered  fome  of  thefe  evil  confequences,  and 
have  laboured  hard  to  rectify  them.  Prefident 
Edwards,  and  manyothers,  made  anoble  (land  againft 
this  flood  of  corruption  ;  yet  they  difcovered  not  the 
fountain, 'whence  thefe  flreams  flow,  and  will  flow, 
till  it  be  removed.  Putting  or  miftaking  the  covenant 
of  circumcifion,  for  the  covenant  which  was  con- 
firmed of  God  in  Chrift  to  Abraham,  twenty-four 
years  before  circumcifion  was  known,  and  fubftitut- 
ing  baptifm  for  circumcifion,  and  determining  the 
fubjecls  of  one  by  the  fubjecls  of  the  other,  without 
any  authority  thus  to  do,  have  produced  all  this  cor- 
ruption, deception,  and  world  of  evil.  Would  good 
rninifters  be  perfuaded  to  lay  the  axe  at  the  root  of 
the  tree,  as  John  did,  the  evils  would  be  foon 
rectified. 


Serm.  VI.]  of  Baptism.  91 

The  fubje&,  on  which  we  now  are,  is  of  fuch  high 
concernment  to  the  church  of  Chrift,  generally,  and 
your  conviction  of  the  truth  of  it,  being  almoft,  or 
quite,  effential  to  our  future  peace  and  union 
together,  I  would  willingly  omit  nothing  which  might 
chafe  away  your  darknefs,  and  caufe  the  true  light 
to  appear.  I  will,  therefore,  add  here  the  hiffory  of 
infant  baptifm.  Should  we  find  that  infant  baptifm 
is  of  men,  as  we  have  already  found  fprinkling  to  be, 
it  is  hoped  that  you  will  either  give  it  up,  or  prac- 
tice it  as  being  of  man's  device,  and  not,  as  Mr. 
Dickinfon  would  have  it,  as  belonging  to  infants  by 
divine  right. 

The  firft  information  which  we  have  of  infant 
baptifm  is  about  the  middle  of  the  fecond  century  ; 
about  which  time  Irenaeus,  in  one  of  his  cpiftles,  has 
the  following  fentence  :  "The  church  received  a 
tradition  from  the  apoftles  to  adminifler  baptifm  to 
little  children  or  infants*." 

The  next  account  we  have  of  this  matter  (if  we 
except  Tertullian,  who  oppofed  the  practice)  is  given 
us  by  Origen,  in  about  the  middle  of  the  third 
century.  His  words  are,  "  Little  children  are 
baptized  for  the  remiffion  of  fins."  For  the  remiflion 
of  original  fin,  or  pollution,  for  of  this  he  is  fpeak- 
ing.  Again  he  fays,  "  The  church  had  an  order 
from  the  apoftles  to  give  baptifm  to  infants." 

Another  part  of  the  hiftory  of  infant  baptifm  we 
have  in  a  quotation  from  the  decifions  of  the  famous 
council  at  Carthage,  in  the  year  253.  It  is  this : 
"  From  baptifm  and  the  grace  of  God  none  ought  to 
be  prohibited ;  efpecially  infants  need  our  help  and 
-the  divine  mercy."  We  have  a  farther  account 
from  Auguftine,  who  flourimed  about  the  middle  of 

*  Ptefideiu  Dickinfon  on  baptifm. 


92  The  Mode  and  Subjects      [Serm.  VI. 

the  fourth  century.  His  words  (writing  of  infant 
baptifm)  are,  "  Let  none,  therefore,  fo  much  as 
ivhisper  any  other  doctrine  in  your  ears  ;  this  the 
church  hath  always  had,  has  always  held." 

The  next  we  hear  of  infant  baptifm  is,  that  the 
practice  was  confirmed,  and  fo  put  beyond  diipute, 
by  pope  Innocent  the  Firfl. 

Now  fire  and  fword  were  the  alKconclufive  argu- 
ments ufed  for  the  conviction  and  reformation  of  all 
who  refufed  to  practice,  or  dared  to  call  in  queflion, 
infant  baptifm.  We  will  pafs  over  the  horrid  perfe- 
ctions, which  now  began  to  be,  and  have  ever  fince 
been  practiced,  at  intervals,  upon  thofe  who  would 
not  fubmit  to  the  divine  right  of  infants  to  baptifm, 
as  conferred  on  them  by  the  ghoftly  popes  of  Rome. 

Luther,  the  famous  German  reformer,  fays,  "that 
infant  baptifm  was  not  determined  till  pope  Innocen- 
tius ;"  and  Grotius,  in  his  annotations  on  Matth. 
xix.  fays,  "  It  was  not  enjoined  till  the  council  of 
Carthage*." 

We  ought,  however,  to  trace  the  hiftory  of  infant 
baptifm  one  (lep  farther,  and  notice  Calvin,  and  a 
multitude  fince,  who  were  unwilling  to  acknowledge 
their  dependence  on  the  Mother  of  Harlots,  for  their 
authority  in  this  matter  \  and  therefore  with  great 
ingenuity  have  difcovered  infant  baptifm,  as  agofpel 
ordinance,  or  the  right  of  infants  to  it,  in  the  law  of 
Mofes.  Indeed  they  have  fuppofed  that  this  doctrine 
is  implied  in  a  number  of  paffages  of  the  New  Tefta- 
ment.  Yet,  I  believe,  r.one  who  practice  it,  are 
willing  to  venture  this  New  Teftament  ordinance 
upon  New  Teftament  evidence. 

Here  you  fee  that  tradition  is  the  foundation  of 
infant  baptifm  ;  error -,  the  belief  that  baptism  washes 

*  Ancient  Dialogue  Revtfed. 


Sefm.  VL]  of  Baptism,  93 

away  original  sin^  the  nurfe  of  its  tender  age  ;  the 
church  of  Rome,  the  conflrmer  and  flrong:  defender 
of  ir ;  and  the  long  fince  repealed,  ceremonial  law 
of  Mofes  the  evidence  for  it.  You  fee,  the  intro- 
duction of  infant  l|aptifm  was  tradition.  Upon  this 
foundation  hath  it  manifedly  reded  ever  fince.  All 
the  ingenious  arguments  of  learned  and  pious  men, 
can,  in  fact,  add  no  drength  to  its  firft  foundation. 
The  fird  we  hear  of  it  is,  it  was  placed  upon  tradi- 
tion, and  there  it  hath  reded,  or  been  danding 
uneafily,  ever  fince. 

Betides,  this  tradition^  as  well  as  the  practice  which 
followed,  is  doubtlefs  the  offspring  of  error,  and 
man's  invention.  At  bed  we  have  but  one  witnefs 
for  it,  in  the  mouth  of  whom  nothing  can  be  edab- 
lilhed.  Origen  fays,  "  The  church  had  an  order 
from  the  Apodles."  Still  we  have  but  one  witnefs. 
Moreover,  the  very  expreflions  of  the  Pasdobaptids 
{how  that  they  were  from  the  beginning  oppofed  by 
the  Baptifh.  Irenssus  fays,  "  We  have  a  tradition." 
OnVen  favs,  "  We  have  an  order."      The  council 

O  J       J 

of  Carthage  fay,  "  Infants  ought  not  to  be  prohibited 
from  baptifm."  Auguftine  faith,  "  Let  none  io 
much  as  whifper  any  other  doctrine  in  your  ears." 
Does  not  every  fyllable  indicate  the  difpute  which 
the  Baptids  had  with  the  inventors  and  fupporters 
of  this  anti-evangelical  principle  and  practice  ? 

It  is  worthy  of  a  moment's  confideration,  that  not 
one  of  the  mod  ancient  fathers  makes  the  lead  pre- 
tention that  infant  baptifm  is  fupported  by  fo  much 
as  one  paffage  in  either  the  Old  Tedament,  or  the 
New  ;  and  they  mention  no  authority  but  tradition^ 
and  an  order  from  the  Apodles,  &c.  which,  at  bed, 
are  very  uncertain  things. 

Whoever  can  fix  their  faith,  continue  their  practice, 
and  venture  their  refponfibility,  on  fuch  a  traditionary 


^4  *The  Mode  arid  "Subjects     [Serm.  VIL 

foundation,  I  cannot.  Upon  this  foundation  for  our 
practice,  have  both  we  and  our  fathers  ventured  to 
oppofe  the  Baptifh,  with  greater  or  lefs  degrees  of 
virulence  ;  whilft,  by  our  tradition,  we  have  greatly 
injured  the  ordinance  of  Chrift,if  not,  in  this  inftance, 
made  void  the  law  of  God* 

In  fine  :  Was  not  infant  baptifm  fir  ft  introduced 
to  efcape  the  offence  of  the  crofs  ?  Is  it  not,  with 
many,  unknowingly  continued  for  the  fame  end  ?  It 
bri-tigeth  the  church  to  its  former  ftate  as  under  the 
law.  If  I  yet  preach  circumcision^  why  do  I  yet 
fuffer  perfecution  ?  then  is  the  offence  of  the  crofs 
ceafed.   Gal.  v.  1 1. 


SERMON  VII 


MATTHEW  XXVIII.  19,  £0. 

Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  o(  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy-Ghoft ; 
teaching  them  to  obferve  all  things  whatfoever  I  have  com- 
manded you  ;  And,  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world.     Amen. 

1  HAVE  already  fet  before  you  the  principal 
part  of  what  I  intended  under  the  two  firft  propor- 
tions in  my  text.  What  remains  is  to  brin:' 
forward — 

III.  Chrift's  command  to  all  his -rninifteringfervants 
to  teach  all  nations,  or  thofe  who  mould  be  difcipltd 
among  them,  to  obferve  all  things  whatfoever  he  had 
commanded  them.  And  then — 

Lastly,  His  comforting  and  ftrengthening  promife, 
which  is,  And,  lo,  I  am  with  you  ahvay,  even  unto 
the  end  of  the  world. 


Serm.  VII.]  of  Baptism.  95 

To  thefe  propofitions  your  ferious,  chriftian 
attention  is  requefted.     The  iirft  is — 

III.  ChriiVs  command  to  the  minifters  of  his 
gofpel  to  teach  all  nations,  or  thofe  who  fhould  be 
difcipled  amongthem,  toobferve  all  things  whatfoever 
he  had  commanded  them. 

Mere  you  fee  the  exteniivenefs  of  my  orders 
received,  and  which  I  muft:  carefully  pbferve,  would 
I  be  obedient  unto  the  Heavenly  Teacher,  who  came 
from  God. 

Chrift  Jefus,  when  perfonally  on  earth,  gave  a 
new  edition  of  his  own  and  his  Father's  mind  and 
will.  In  this  new  edition,  he  abrogated  or  left  out, 
many  ceremonies  of  the  old,  as  being  no  longer 
ufcful.  Under  the  old  edition,  the  church  was  in 
its  childhood,  and  therefore  under  fnch  tutors  and 
governors  as  were  not  needed  in  her  riper  years.  In 
this  new  edition,  Chrift  hath  pointed  out  what  is  to 
be  prefer ved  of  the  old.  The  (una  of  the  moral  Jaw, 
and  the  prophets,  were  to  continue  in  force.  Thefe 
are,  indeed,  in  the  very  nature  of  things,  binding  on 
accountable  creatures.  But  when  Chrift,  the 
anointed,  and  expected  MefFiah,  was  come,  then  all 
thofe  rites,  Sacrifices  and  typical  inftitutions  of  the 
ceremonial  law,  which  were,  together,  as  a  fchool- 
maftertolead  the  obferver  to  Chrift,  were  difannulled, 
being  no  longer  of  ufe. 

You  fee  what  minifters  have  authority  to  teach, 
for  both  doctrine  and  practice.  It  is  what  Chrift 
hath  commanded  them,  and  nothing  which  is  contrary 
from  it. 

In  time  paft  I  have  taught  you  the  precepts  of 
Chrift,  fomewhat  largely.  As  I  have  taught  them, 
fo  you  have,  as  I  believed,  received  them  to  the 
faving  of  your  fouls.  The  ordinance  of  the  fupper, 
I  have  taught  in   its  fimpliciry,   and  fo  have   you 


§5  The  Mtrfe  ant  ^vh;ccu       [Scrm.  VH. 

receiv  ]  '  You  have  alfo  been  informed,  that 
Jcfu<  ;  ppoioted  baptifm,  as  an  ordinance  to 

be  oh  i  ■    i  •  .  church.     But  wHat  that  ordinance 

was,  an  -       ii  fubje£b  of  it,  you  have  not 

been  particularly  t<  !di  till  of  late.  Nor  had  I.  till  a 
fliort  time  finei  ,  a  clear  unSerftandffig  of  either.  I, 
no  doubr,  ou„ht  to  have  known  them  before,  but 
till  i  did,  I  could  i  ot  teach  them  to  you.  When  I 
came  to  the  knowledge  of  them,  it  was  no  longer 
in  my  power  to  be  faithful  to  Chrift,  and  rcfufe  to 
teach  them.  In  the  fimrjlicity  of  my  heart  have  I 
taught  you  what  is  baptifm,  and  who  are  to  be 
baptized. 

Whether  thefe  things  be,  or  be  not,  agreeable  to 
my  former  notions  of  them,  is  nothing  to  the  point* 
One  thing  I  am  fettled  in,  I  have,  of  late,  taught 
them  to  you,  as  Chrift  hath  commanded  me. 

Not  only  was  it  my  duty  to  teach  you  thefe  things, 
but  I  am  commanded  to  teach  you  to  obferve  them  : 
for  then  are  you  ChrifVs  difciples,  when  you  do  all 
things  whatfoeverhe  hath  commanded  you. 

To  obferve  thefe  things,  is  like  obedient  children 
to  receive  inftruction,  and  then  to  fearch  the  fcrip- 
tures,  that  you  may  know  how  thefe  things  are.  It 
belongs  to  me  to  teach  you— 

i.  To  obferve  thefe  things  till  you  underhand 
them,  and  then — 

2.  To  obferve  them  in  your  practice. 

i.  Would  you  walk  in  all  the  ftatutes  and 
ordinances  of  the  Lord  blamelefs,  you  mud  obferve 
thefe  things  till  you  underfland  -hem. 

You  and  I  have  been  unreafonably  prejudiced 
againft  light  and  truth  in  thefe  matters.  If  1  do  not 
misjudge,  the  Lord  hath,  in  anfwer  to  prayer, 
afforded  me  the  needed  light  and  knowledge  upon 
the  fubject.     It  was  not  in  a  day,  nor  in  a  month, 


Serm.  VII.]  of  Baptism.  97 

after  my  prejudices  received  a  fhock,  and  my  mind 
partial  conviction,  that  I  obtained  fatisfaction.  Nor  can 
I  expect  that  you  will,  all  of  you,  poffefs  fuch  a  ready 
mind,  as  to  give  up  your  long,  and  almoft  inveterate, 
prejudices,  and  receive  the  light  at  once.  It  is  by 
little  and  little,  that  anti-chriftian  errors  mud  be 
deftroyed  from  the  church,  and  from  your  hearts, 
as  well  as  from  mine. 

You  may  expect  to  find  me  ready,  at  any  time, 
and  at  all  times,  to  afford  you  every  inftruction,  and 
to  anfwer  any  objection  which  may  occur  to  your 
candid  minds.  You  fhould  have  your  Bibles  always 
nigh  you,  and  poffefs,  continually  a  prayerful, 
teachable  fpirit.  Be  determined  to  hearken  to  none 
but  Chrifl,  and  to  be  obedient  to  all  his  commands. 

Be  careful  to  avoid  all  bitternefs  and  evil  fpeaking. 
Wifdom  will  not  dwell  with  flrife ;  nor  will  the 
wrath  of  man  work  the  righteoufnefs  of  God. 

2.  It  belongs  to  me  to  teach  you  to  obferve  the 
ordinance  of  baptifm,  and  the  proper  fubjects,  in 
your  practice.  You  muft  underftand  thefe  things 
before  you  can  acceptably  practice  them.  Some  of 
you,  no  doubt,  fufficiently  underftand  them  to  pro- 
ceed to  practice.  But  1  have  not  thought  it  duty, 
to  haften  your  practice,  or  to  lead  you  by  example, 
left  the  minds  of  others  fhould  be  injured.  It  is  a 
time  to  weaken  prejudices,  and  not  to  increafe  them. 
Wifdom  dwells  with  prudence.  Many  of  your 
minds,  as  well  as  mine,  are,  with  pleafmg  expecta- 
tion, looking  forward  to  the  time,  when  we  may, 
with  nighly,  or  quite,  all  our  brethren  with  us,  keep 
all  the  ordinances  of  the  gofpel,  as  Chrift  hath 
commanded  us. 

When  you  fhall  underftand  thefe  things,  happy 
will  you  be  if  you  practice  them  :  for  all  gofpel 
obedience  gives  pleafure  in  the  practice. 


93  The  Mode  and  Subjects     [Serm.  VII. 

As  Mofes  had  much  to  do  in  Egypt,  before  God 
faid  unto  him,  '  Speak  unto  the  people  that  they  go 
forward,'  fo,  my  brethren,  I  may  have  much  to  do 
before  things  fhall  be  in  readinefs,  and  before  the 
Lord  fhall  bid  me  fpeak,  faying  unto  you,  Go  for- 
ward. But,  if  the  Lord  will,  I  would  live  to  fee 
that  day. 

After  Ifrael  went  forward,  raid  were  baptized  unto 
Mofes,  in  the  cloud,  and  in  the  fea,  they  had  a 
tedious  wildernefs  to  pafs  ;  fo  it  may  be  with  us. 
But,  fhould  we  obferve  the  pillar  of  cloud  and  of 
fire,  we  fhall  come  to  the  promifed  land  ;  and,  it 
may  be,  with  much  fafety  and  fpeed,  fhould  we 
hearken  to  the  good  counfel  of  Jofhua. 

You  know,  my  brethren,  as  it  is  ray  duty  to  teach 
you  to  obferve  all  things  whatfoever  Chrifl  hath 
commanded  me,  fo  it  is  your  duty  to  receive  inflruc- 
tion,  and  be  obedient.  Your  obedience  is  not  to  be 
rendered  to  me,  but  to  Jefus  Chrifl,  and  to  the 
word  of  his  teftimony. 

It  will  doubtlefs  occur  to  your  minds,  Whom 
fhall  we  hear  ?  One  minifler  teaches  us  one  thing, 
and  another  teaches  us  differently.  You  are  to  hear 
no  man  any  farther  than  he  fhall  teach  you  as  the 
man  Chrifl  Jefus  hath  commanded  him.  Miniflers 
have  no  authority,  any  farther  than  they  receive  it 
from  him.  He  hath  given  them  no  power  to  teach, 
but  what  He  hath  commanded.  When  they  tranfcribe 
out  of  the  old  into  the  new  edition  of  God's  word 
and  will,  and  tell  us  that  the  rite  and  covenant  of 
circumcifion  are  to  explain  to  us  the  obfervance  of  a 
New  Teftament  ordinance,  we  are  not  obliged  to 
believe  them,  unlefs  they  point  us  to  the  place  where 
Chrifl  hath  fo  commanded.  You  are  to  obey  them 
who  have  the  rule  over  you.  But  even  Paul  was 
not  to  be   followed  any  farther  than  he  followed 


5erm.  VII. ]  of  Baptism.  99 

Chrift.  So  it  ought  to  be  with  you,  in  hearkening 
to  what  your  teachers  fay.  Minifters  are  but  men, 
and  they  have  proved  themfelves  to  be  fo,  by  chang- 
ing the  ordinance  of  baptifm  into  quite  a  different 
thing,  and  by  adminiftering  their  new  rite  to  fubje&s 
to  whom  Jefus  Chrift  never  commanded  it.  It  furely 
is  a  furpriling  thing,  and  not  to  be  accounted  for, 
but  from  the  relics  of  human  depravity,  that  fo  many 
good  men  fhould,  unknowingly,  do  and  teach  things 
which  are  quite  afide  from  what  Chrift  hath  com- 
manded them. 

It  is  too  late  for  you,  my  hearers,  to  cloak  your- 
felves  under  what  great  and  good  men  have  faid  ; 
for  the  truth  of  the  Lord  hath  already  been  told  you. 
Had  I  not  come  and  fpoken  to  you  this  word  of 
Chrift,  you  would  not  have  had  fin  ;  but  now  have 
you  no  cloak  for  difobedience.       We  now  come— ■ 

Lastly^  To  confider  Chrift's  comforting  and 
ftrengthening  promife  to  his  miniftering  fervants  ; 
which  is,  And,  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto 
the  end  of  the  world. 

Chrift  Jefus  hath  been  with  his  minifters :  and 
he  will  be — 

1.  In  preparing  them  for  their  office.  He  was 
perfonally  with  his  firft  gofpel  heralds,  for  the  fpace 
of  three  years,  or  more  ;  after  this  he  left  them  for 
a  fhort  fpace  ;  in  this  fhort  interval  they  paffed  a 
fevere  trial.  He  was  with  them  again,  at  times, 
for  forty  days.  Soon  after  this  he  fent  his  Spirit 
upon  them,  and  filled  them  v/ith  it  to  a  remarkable 
degree.  Then  they  were  prepared  for  their  office. 
They  fpeedily  filled  it  remarkably,  and  the  effecl 
was  wonderful.  Three  thoufand  were  converted 
in  a  day. 

Chrift  is  as  really,  though  not  fo  apparently,  with 
aJl  his  gofpel  meffengers  in  preparing  them  to  go 


i  oo  The  Mode  and  Subjects     [Serm.  VII. 

forth  into  his  harveft.  Thofe,  who  have  not  Chrift 
with  them,  to  prepare  them  for  their  office,  are  but 
as  wolves  in  fheep's  clothing,  when  they  go  forth 
into  the  miniftry.  They  preach  for  filthy  lucre ',  and 
frequently  have  their  reward.  It  is  too  often  the 
cafe,  that  thofe,  whom  Chrift  hath  prepared,  are 
obliged  to  go  into  the  field,  or  make  tents  for  their 
fupport,  whilft  fuch  as  run,  not  being  fent,  fwim  in 
luxury. 

2.  Jefus  Chrift  will  be  with  his  minifters  in  bring- 
ing divine  things  to  their  remembrance. 

It  is  the  Lord's  Spirit  which  caufeth  divine  truth 
to  occur  to  the  minds  of  his  fervants.  Truths, 
which  have  been  forgotten  for  months,  and  it  may 
be  for  years,  or  paffages  which  before  were  not 
underftood,  may  be,  and  not  unfrequently  are,  frefh 
and  plain  in  the  minds  of  his  fervants,  for  their  com- 
fort, or  for  the  comfort  and  inftrudtion  of  others,  or 
for  the  comfort  and  edification  of  both. 

3.  Chrift  will  be  with  his  minifters  in  affording 
them  wifdom,  fortitude  and  faithfulnefs. 

The  entrance  of  his  word  giveth  light.  He 
maketh  light  their  paths,  and  ordereth  all  their  fteps. 
He  maketh  their  feet  like  hind's  feet,  and  caufeth 
them  to  be  fwifter  than  the  eagle,  ftronger  than 
lion's,  wife  as  ferpents,  and  harmlefs  as  doves.  With 
what  wifdom  did  Stephen  fpeak  !  With  what  forti- 
tude did  Peter,  Paul,  and  a  thoufand  others,  addrefs 
their  auditories !  With  what  wifdom  hath  he  made 
his  fervants  to  fpeak  !  With  what  fortitude  to  bear, 
with  what  faithfulnefs  to  endure,  for  his  name's 
fake  !  How  remarkably  hath  it  been  thus,  in  times 
of  perfecution  !  And  when  will  you  find  a  time* 
when  they  that  are  born  after  the  flefh  do  not  perfe- 
cute  thofe  who  are  born  after  the  Spirit  ?  How  often 
is  it  the  cafe,  when  minifters,  like  Paul,  wax  bold, 


Serin.  VII.]  of  Baptism.  101 

and  teftify  that  Jefus  is  the  Chrift,  and  what  are  his 
word  and  inftitutions,  that  they  are  perfecuted, 
openly  or  more  fecretly  ! 

4.  Chrift  is  and  will  be  with  his  miniftering 
fervants,  whilft  they  are  reproached  and  fuffering  for 
his  name  and  truth  fake. 

He  fays  to  them  all,  If  the  world  hate  you,  ye 
know  that  it  hated  me  before  it  hated  you.  When 
Chrift's  miniflers  are  reviled  and  fuffer  for  his  fake, 
his  truth  and  Spirit  bear  their  fpiiits  up.  He  gives 
them  to  believe  and  know,  that  though  they  weep 
now,  they  fhall  foon  rejoice  ;  that  their  light  afflic- 
tions, which  are  but  for  a  moment,  are  preparing 
them  for,  and  working  out  for  them,  a  far  more 
exceeding  and  an  eternal  weight  of  glory. 

5.  Chrift  Jefus  will  be  with  his  faithful  miniflers 
in  giving  them  to  fee  their  defire  upon  his  enemies. 

This  appears  to  be  particularly  implied  in  my  text. 
They  are  commanded  to  go  and  difciple  all  nations. 
Their  defire  is  to  fee  difciples  multiplied.  They  go 
forth,  Chrift  goes  forth  with  them.  Many  of  Chrift's 
enemies  fubmit  to  his  yoke,  which  is  eafy,  and  to  his 
burden,  which  is  light.  In  this  are  they  gratified, 
and  their  defire  on  them  is  accomplished. 

6.  Chrift  is  with  his  miniflers  in  explaining  and 
defending  his  truth. 

How  did  Peter,  Paul  and  others  in  the  firft  ages 
of  chriftianity,  explain  and  vindicate  the  truth,  to  the 
confounding  of  both  Jews  and  Gentiles !  Whenever, 
in  ages  fince,  he  hath  fpoken  the  word,  great  hath 
been  the  company,  or  force,  of  thofe  who  have  pub- 
limed,  explained  and  defended  it.  Martin  Luther, 
John  Calvin,  and  a  number  more  in  the  reformation, 
were  like  flames  of  fire :  nothing  could  flop  them 
from  publishing,  explaining  and  defending  the  truths 
of  the  Saviour,  for  he  was  with  them. 

k  2 


i  oi  The  Mode  and  Subjects     [Serin.  VIL 

You  will  afk,  How  is  it  that  Clirifl  is  with  his 
miniflers  when  they  contradict  one  the  other,  and 
themfelves  too  ?  Answer,  It  is  not  faid,  that  Chrift 
is  with  his  miniflers  in  explaining  and  defending 
error.  Error  is  human  ;  truth  is  divine.  When 
miniders  undertake  to  fupport  error,  they  go  without 
Chriil's  blefTing  and  prefence  in  thi-s  their  labour. 
Hence  ic  is  that  they  are  fo  contradictory  and  incon- 
iiflent  ;  and  are  obliged  to  wrefl  the  fcriptures  from 
their  plain  and  eafy  fenfe,  to  fupport  a  beloved 
prejudice.  But  when  they  take  up  for  truth,  plain 
icripture  fupports  them,  and  they  have  plain  and 
pleafant  work,  and  their  fubjects  fupported  with 
eafe,  as  you  have  feen  whilif.  attending  to  the  feveral 
truths  in  my  texts. 

Beiides,  it  may  be  the  cafe,  that  fome  very  good 
men  may  mix  truth  and  error,  the  commands  of  God 
and  their  own  traditions,  together ;  and,  whilfl 
practicing  accordingly,  they  may  enjoy  a  comforta- 
ble frame  of  mind,  and  hence  conclude  that  their 
beloved  compound  is  all  from  heaven.  This  may 
be  iiluflrated  by  the  following  example.  Mr.  S. 
rinds  it  to  be  a  trurh,  that  his  infant  offspring,  as 
well  as  every  thing  elfe,  fhould  be  devoutly  given 
10  God.  He  hath  received  and  holds  a  tradition 
from  the  fathers,  that  his  infants  fhould  be  baptized. 
He  publicly  gives  them  to  the  Lord,  and  folemnly 
promiies  to  inflrucl  them  in  the  way  of  truth  and 
duty.  He,  at  the  fame  time,  hath  the  ordinance  of 
baptifm  adminiftered  to  them,  or  adminiffers  'it 
himfelf.  During  the  whole  tranfaclion  he  poffeffes 
much  comfort  in  his  mind.  His  confequence,  is  the 
whole  matter  is  according  to  truth,  jufl  as  God 
would  have  it.,  Is  not  this  going  a  little  too  much 
by  fenfe3  and  not  quite  enough  by  fcripture  ?  Does 
jt  not  contain  a  spice  of  entbuiiafm  ?  Would  not  the 


Serm.  VII..]  of  Baptism,  103 

good  man  have  had  the  fame  mental  fatisfac"tion,  had 
he  poiTefTed  the  famefpirituality,  and  yet  had  omitted 
that  part  which  is  enjoined  by  tradition  only  ? 

Lastly,  The  Great  Captain  of  falvation  is  with 
his  minifters,  to  teach,  lead  and  comfort  them,  in  all 
their  trials,  in  all  their  (traits.  Whofoever  will  leave 
them,  he  will  not.  Though  he,  the  Great  High 
Priefr.  of  our  profeffion,when  fuffering  for  his  people's 
fins,  was  left  alone — all  forfook  him  ;  yet,  whenever 
his  friends  are  afflicted,  he  kindly  calls,  faymg,  Lo, 
I  am  with  you.  This  hath  been  the  (lay  of  good 
men  in  all  ages,  in  all  circumftances.  Thofe  who 
have  v/andered  about  in  fheep  ikins  and  goat  fkins, 
who  have  been  afflicted,  tormented,  of  whom  the 
world  was  not  worthy,  have  found  their  refuge  here. 
There  is  nothing  like  this  to  fupport  the  feeble, 
diftreffed  foul.  When  godly  minifters  have  been 
obliged  to  leave  their  people,  yes,  and  their  families, 
and  fometimes  their  native  country,  for  the  truth 
lake,  this  hath  fuftained  them — Chrift  was  with  them. 
Preiident  Edwards,  for  a  noble  attempt  at  partial 
reformation,  was  conftrained  to  flee  his  beloved 
charge:  but  Chrift  was,  no  doubt,  with  him.  Should 
I,  for  laying  the  axe  at  the  root  of  the  tree,  be 
obliged  to  leave  you,  though,  for  the  prefent,  I  fee 
no  particular  reafon  to  apprehend  fuch  an  event,  yet 
1  trull  this  will  be  my  hiding  place — Jefus,  who  will 
be  with  me. 

APPLICATION. 

From  what  hath  been  faid  in  the  preceding 
difcourfes,  it  appears — 

i.  That  the  two  fides  of  the  controverfy  between 
the  Baptifts  and  the  Pssdobaptifts  {land  thus. 

Before  I  date  the  two  fides  of  the  controverfy,  it 
is  but  reafonable  that  I  define  thofe  whom  it  refpefts. 


io4  The  Mode  and  Subjects     [Serm.  VII. 

By  the  Baptifls,  on  one  fide,  I  mean  the  regular 
Calviniflic  Baptifls.  By  the  Psedobaptiils,  on  the 
other,  I  now  intend  the  Calviniftic  Congregationalifts 
among  them.  I  give  this  definition,  that  I  may  be 
clearly  underflood. 

You  fee  both  fides  are  Calvinifls,  that  is,  they  are 
agreed  in  what  are  (tiled  the  do&rines  of  grace. 
They  are  both  of  the  congregational  order,  as  it 
refpecls  the  government  of  the  churches. 

Now  for  the  controverfy,  and  it  is  this  :  The 
Baptifls  hold  immerfion  only  to  be  baptifm.  The 
Psedobaptifls  hold  that  fprinkling  may  be  fubflituted 
for  immerfion,  and  may  anfwer  jufl  as  well. 

The  Baptifls  hold  that  the  fcripturesknownothing 
of  a  chriflian  ordinance  of  baptifm  for  unbelievers 
and  infidels.  The  Psedobaptifls  hold  that,  if  a  great 
man,  who  hath  a  thoufand  flaves,  fhould  become  a 
difciple,  then  all  his  houfehold  are  to  be  counted 
difciples,  and  are  to  be  baptized. 

The  Baptifls  hold  that  the  church  of  the  New 
Teftament  is  compofed  of  vifible  or  profeffed  faints. 
The  confiflent  Psedobaptifls  hold,  that  this  great 
man,  his  thoufand  flaves,  together  with  his  wife  and 
children,  all  belong  to  the  gofpel  church,  though  he 
only  be  a  believer  in  Chrifl. 

The  Baptifls  hold  that  none  have  a  right  to  partake 
of  the  Lord's  fupper,  but  thofe  who  are  his  friends. 
The  confiflent  Predobaptifls  hold,  that  all  the  adults 
in  this  great  man's  houfehold,  if  they  be  not  guilty 
of  grefs  immorality,  have  a  right  to  come. 

The  Baptifls  plead  New  Teilament  authority  for 
the  defence  of  their  principles  and  practice,  where 
they  differ  from  their  brethren  of  the  Psedobaptifls. 
The  Paedobaptifls  in  fupport  of  their  fentiments 
plead  convenience,  and  the  covenant  and  rite  of 
circumcifion,  which  were  decaying,  waxing  old,  and 


Serm.  VII.]  of  Baptism.  105 

ready  to  vanifh  away,  more  than  feventeen  hundred 
years  ago. 

The  Baptifts  bring  nighly  threefcore  texts  of 
fcripture,  which  are  plainly  and  fully  to  their  point 
in  favor  of  immerfion.  The  Paedobaptifts  mention 
three  or  four  texts,  which,  at  mod,  are  but  very 
doubtfully  in  their  favor  ;  and,  when  rightly  under- 
ftood,  appear  fully  againft  them. 

What  advantage,  my  brethren,  have  the  Paedo- 
baptifts over  the  Baptifts  ?  and  with  what  crime,  or 
error,  in  this  matter,  do  they  ftand  convicted  ? 

2.  It  appears  that  gofpel  minifters  have  no 
authority  to  teach  chriftians,  that  their  children  and 
fervants  fhould  be  baptized,  becaufe  Abraham's 
were  circumcifed. 

Chrift  hath  no  where  commanded  them  to  teach 
thus.  Chrift  hath  no  where  commanded  them  to 
teach  infant  baptifm  at  all,  or  baptifm  upon  the  faith 
of  another  ;  much  lefs,  that  they  are  to  be  baptized 
becaufe  Abraham's  were  circumcifed. 

3.  It  appears,  that  many  of  the  pious  and  learned 
clergy  of  New  England  have  made  fome  noble  and 
promifing  advances  towards  truth  in  this  matter  5 
yet  in  this  they  are  inconfiftent  with  themfelves. 

They  will  receive  none  to  the  communion  but 
fuch  as  profefs  faith  in  our  Lord  Jefus  Chrift,  as  well 
as  repenrance  for  fin  :  and  they  will  adminifter 
baptifm  to  the  children  of  no  other.  Here,  in  two 
inftances,  they  refufe  to  follow  the  law  of  circum- 
cilion.  One,  in  refufing  to  admit  to  the  fupper 
impenitent,  though  civil,  baptized  perfons ;  the 
other,  in  not  admitting  to  baptifm  the  children  of 
all  thofe  who  have  been  baptized.  This  is  confident 
with  truth  fo  far  as  it  goes ;  but  inconfiftent  with 
the  notion  that  the  fubjec"ts  of  baptifm  are  to  be 
determined  from  the  fubjects  of  circumcifion. 


io6  The  Mode  and  Subjects    [Serai.  VII. 

Thefe  good  men,  fo  long  as  they  pofTefs  their 
prefent  light,  muft  come  over  to  the  true  Baptift 
ground,  or  fubmit  to  the  imputation  of  inconfiftency. 
I  wifh  them  to  come  over.  For  myfelf,  I  expect  to, 
though  my  carnal  nature  hates  the  name  of  a  Baptift, 
as  much  as  theirs  does.  But  my  better  judgment 
tells  me,  that  the  Baptifts  are  on  the  gofpel  ground. 

4.  It  is  a  matter  of  lamentation,  that  pious  and 
learned  minifters  have  not  a  little  more  felf-denial : 
then  they  might  be  confident  with  themfelves  and 
with  truth  too.  Could  I  be  with  them,  and  aik 
them  this  plain  queflion,  Do  you  not  find  a  little 
backwardnefs  from  fearching  critically  into  the 
primitive  meaning  and  practice  of  baptifm  ?  I  fear 
they  would  anfwer  with  fome  reluctance. 

To  me,  I  confefs,  it  appears  an  hard  cafe,  that  the 
Baptifts  fhould  fuffer  fo  much  reproach,  merely  on 
account  of  their  fentiments,  when  many  of  our  befl 
old  divines  have  given  them  the  ground,  and  con- 
fefled,  that  their  fentiments,  as  to  the  mode,  are  from 
heaven,  and  ours  from  convenience.  Our  oppofition 
to  them,  on  account  of  the  fubjects,  appears  but  little 
better,  being  but  poorly  fupported  by  fcripture  : 
they  having  the  plain  word,  and  full  current  of  all 
the  prophets  from  Mofes  to  Malachi,  fo  far  as  they 
have  fpoken  of  the  gofpel  church,  together  with  the 
New  Teftament,  in  their  favor ;  whilft  for  us,  in 
this  particular,  nothing  better  can  be  alledged,  than 
the  antiquated  rite  of  circumcifion.  If  the  Baptifts 
be  right,  why  not  join  them,  and  fuffer  fmall  incon- 
veniences ?  If  wrong,  why  not  prove  them  fo  ?  It  is 
pitiful  that  great  and  good  men  fhould  be  dallying 
with  inconclufive  arguments,  when  the  time  is  long 
fince  come,  that  the  highway  of  holinefs  fhould  be  fo 
plain,  that  wayfaring  men,  though  fools,  fhould  not 
err  therein. 


Serm.  VII.]  of  Baptism.  icy 

5.  We  fee  why  good  men  have  been  fo  divided 
among  themfelves,  as  to  infant  baptifm. 

The  reafon  is,  they  go  without  Chrift,  in  this 
matter.     He  is  not  divided. 

Some  baptize  all.  Others  will  baptize  only  the 
children  in  the  lioufeholds  of  communicants.  Some 
baptize  upon  the  half-way  covenant.  Some  will 
baptize  all  who  are  under  age.  Again,  others  will 
baptize  all  under  feven.  Others  ftill  will  baptize 
upon  the  good  promifes  of  godfathers  and  god- 
mothers. You  will  obferve  I  ufe  the  word  baptize 
in  a  fenfe  which  I  believe  to  be  improper,  but  I 
would  not  offend  you  with  a  word,  when  my  mean- 
ing maybe  underftood.  But  what  propriety  is  there 
in  all  this  inconfiftency  about  the  fubjefts  of  baptifm ! 
Does  not  the  matter  look  as  though  there  were  no 
rule  to  go  by,  or  as  though  none  underftood  what 
it  was ! 

6.  We  fee  why  good  men,  when  writing  or  fpeak- 
ing  of  baprifm,  are  left  to  fpeak  untruths. 

It  is  doubtlefs  becaufe  they  will  follow  their  own 
prejudices,  and  not  the  truth.  Error  hath  divided 
them,  and  Chrift  is  not  with  them  in  what  they  fay. 
Some  good  men,  not  many,  dare  affert,  in  oppofition 
to  the  Baptifts,  that  there  is  not  a  word  about 
immerfion  for  baptifm,  in  all  the  Bible.  F or  laymen 
to  fay  thus  is  presumption,  and  for  men  of  learning  to 
make  the  after tion,  is  almost  unpardonable.  For  they 
know,  or  ought  to  know,  that  the  word,  to  baptize, 
is  not  once  mentioned  in  all  the  Bible  but  immerfion 
is  mentioned,  unlefs  they  mean  to  play  upon  the 
word  ;  and  then  it  is  a  truth,  when  baptizb  is  men- 
tioned, immerfion  is,  if  they  will  give  it  its  plain 
literal  Englifh. 

If    the    Baptifts    have    the    plain,    Jiteral    and 
unequivocal  fenfe  of  the  fcripture,  in  their  favor,  is 


io8  The  Mode  and  Subjects     [Serm.  VII. 

it  not  enough,  that  they  are  defpifed  and  perfecuted, 
by  the  wicked  of  every  clafs,  and  not  helped  by  any  ; 
but,  muft  we  add  to  their  affliction,  by  falfehood,  or 
equivocation  !  O  prejudice,  what  wilt  thou  not  do, 
even  in  a  faint ! 

Befides,  our  good  brethren,  who  are  fo  warm 
againft  the  Baptifts,  and  will  not  allow  them  a  word 
for  their  mode,  do  not  agree  together  to  inform  us 
what  the  mode  ihould  be.  One  tells  us,  it  is 
fprinkling,  another  fays,  pouring  is  the  mode,  a  third 
contends  for  warning  the  face,  a  fourth  is  for  putting 
water  ou  the  back  of  the  neck,  as  the  Swifs  are  faid 
to  do  ;  whilft  others  affirm,  that  all  thefe  are  right. 
Now,  fuppofe  the  Baptifts  are  wrong,  who  fhall  we 
fay  are  in  the  right,  or  is  there  no  right  in  this 
bufinefs  r  Does  not  all  this  look  juft  as  it  would  were 
there  an  error  at  the  bottom  ?  Hath  the  Great 
Teacher,  who  came  from  God,  left  matters  thus,  at 
loofe  ends  r  Does  the  Bible  thus  differ,  whilft  point- 
ing out  the  mode  ?  No.  Its  language  is  pure  and 
determinate. 

7.  It  appears,  that,  in  infant  fprinkling  for 
baptifm,  the  intent  of  the  inftitution  is  loft,  and 
becomes  no  chriftian  ordinance  at  all. 

Both  the  thing  itfelf  and  the  fubjects  of  it  are 
changed.  It  is  quite  a  different  thing  from  what 
the  Inftitutor  hath  appointed.  Neither  this  mode, 
nor  thtfe  fubje&s,  are  known  in  the  inftitution,  nor 
in  any  paffage  of  the  Bible,  where  baptifm  is  men- 
tioned. This  mode  is  of  man's  device,  and  the 
fubje&s  of  it  have,  at  beft,  but  a  traditional  right. 
For  good  men  to  do  thus,  whilft  they  think  it  con- 
fident with  truth,  appears  to  be  a  fin  of  ignorance  ; 
but,  if  any  do  thus,  while  they  know  what  the 
fcriptures  enjoin,  their  practice  deferve  a  harder 
name. 


Serm.VIL]  of  Baptism.  109 

8.  It.appears  that  dipping,  immerfion,  or  burying, 
in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghoft,  is  bapiifm. 

No  man  of  real  piety,  and  folid  learning,  ever 
doubted  it.  Whereas,  fprinkling  hath  been  doubted 
by  many,  denied,  continually,  by  a  large  clafs  of 
chriftians,  and  been  proved  by  none  to  have  been 
ever  appointed  as  the  chriftian  ordinance  of  baptifm. 

9.  We  fee,  that  every  plea  which  hath  been  made, 
for  a  general,  or  partial  neglect  of  the  fcripture  mode 
of  baptifm,  is  an  indirect,  though  unintentional, 
charge  of  negligence,  or  want  of  benevolence,  or  of 
forefight,  in  the  Divine  Inftitutor.  Let  every  man 
of  candor  and  common  fenfe  examine  this  matter. 
Did  not  the  Lord,  who  made  our  northern  climes, 
know  how  cold  they  are  ? — Did  he  know  them  to 
be  too  cold  for  his  difciples  who  might  live  in  them, 
to  be  feparated  from  the  world  by  being  vifibly 
buried  and  raifed  again  to  join  his  kingdom  ?  Why 
then  did  he  not  mention  an  exception  in  our  favor  ? 
and  not  leave  us  to  fufTer  this  inconvenience,  or  be 
in  perpetual  uncertainty,  and  continual  difpute,  to 
defend  our,  at  beft,  but  doubtful  practice  ?  Did  he 
not  perfectly  know  all  the  compelling  necessities^  which 
Cyprian  and  others  would,  in  their  erring  judgments, 
find  to  break  over  the  bounds  of  the  baptifmal  infli- 
tution  ?  Why  then  did  he  make  no  provifion  for 
thefe  extreme  cafes  ?  By  doing  thus,  he  would  have 
faved  the  Paedobaptifh  a  world  of  anxiety,  conten- 
tion and  cenfure.  The  fa  ft  appears  to  be,  that  our 
Lord  intended,  that  the  way  of  admiffion  into  his 
kingdom  fhould  be  uniform,  and  that  thofe,  who 
would  not  fubmit  to  it,  fhould  fufTer  the  inconve- 
nience of  darknefs,  error  and  flrife. 

10.  From  what  hath  been  faid  in  the  preceding 
difcourfes,  is  not  the  following  a  fair  and  undeniable 


L 


i  io  The  Mode  and  Subjects       [Serm.  VII. 

conclufion  ?  That  I  and  other  Psedobaptift  minifters, 
(o  far  as  we  have  fpoken  a  word  againft  the  Baptifts, 
and  efpecially  that  thofe,  who  have  publicly  warned 
their  people  to  avoid  the  B.iptifts  and  flee  from  them, 
as  from  a  dividing  and  dangerous  herefy,  have  in 
this  matter  acted  the  part  of  the  old  fcribes,  Phari- 
sees, hypocrites — who  would  not  go  into  the  king- 
dom of  Godthemklves,  and  thcfewhowereentering, 
they  hindered. 

I  by  no  means  fuppofe  that  all  who  have  done 
thus,  are  indeed  hypocrites,  fave  in  this  particular. 
No  reafonable  doubt  can  be  entertained,  but  many 
of  them  are  learned,  pious  and  very  ufeful  men  ; 
men,  whom  the  Lord  hath  greatly  honoured  as 
labourers,  in  gathering  in  the  hurveft  of  fouls.  Many 
of  thefe  have  been,  in  meafure,  bold,  zealous  and 
faithful,  like  Peter  ;  yet  when  they  diffemble,  or 
teach  and  practice  contrary  from  the  truth,  they  are 
to  be  blamed,  yes,  they  are,  in  this  inftance,  worthy 
to  be  rebuked. 

It  would,  indeed,  be  very  injudicious  in  me  to 
contend,  that  all  which  the  Baptifts  have  faid  and 
done  is  juftifiable.  It  would  be  equally  injudicious 
to  juilify  myfelf,  or  my  brethren,  where  we  have 
both  faid  and  done  things  contrary  from  the  church 
and  name  of  Jefus  of  Nazareth.  It  is  time  for  both 
minifters  and  people  to  look  to  this  matter,  left  the 
Lord  fend  leannefs  into  our  fouls. 

u.  From  a  review  of  the  whole  fubjeel:,  the 
following  inference  appears  natural,  and  at  the  fame 
time  worthy  of  much  confideration.  The  divinely 
conftituted  method  by  which  any  of  the  fallen  race 
are  to  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven  below,  remarka- 
bly fets  to  onr  view  the  way  by  which  we  are  to 
commence  perfect   members    of   the   kingdemi    of 


Serm.  VII.]  of  Baptism.  HI 

heaven  above.     Our  obedience  to  the  former  is  a 
practical  declaration  of  our  faith  in  the  latter. 

In  joining  Chrift's  kingdom  on  earth,  we  profef- 
fedly  die  unto  fin,  go  down  to  the  grave,  are  buried, 
and  rife,  as  from  the  dead.  To  join  the  kingdom 
of  glory,  we  rauft  actually  experience  what  is  but 
fhadowed  forth  in  baptifm.  We  mud  die,  be 
buried,  or  return  to  the  duft,  and  rife  from  the  dead. 

How  exactly  doth  our  entrance  into  the  church 
militant  fhadow  forth  our  hoped  for  entrance  into 
the  church  triumphant !  It  a lfo  appears  that  Chrifl 
hath  directed,  that  the  fubjech  of  the  one  fhould  be 
profeffedly,  what  the  fubjects  of  the  other  (hall  be 
actually,  all  flints. 

How  beautiful  doth  the  church  appear,  fo  far  as 
flie  obferves  the  commands  of  her  Lord,  as  to  the 
members  which  me  admits,  and  the  manner  of 
receiving  them  !  She  thus  rcfembles  Jerufalem, 
which  is  above,  which  is  the  mother  of  us  all,  if  we 
be  chriftians.  May  the  Lord  direct  our  hearts  into 
the  love  of  the  truth. 

In  the  conclufion  of  the  whole,  it  becomes  us  to 
add,  to  the  truths  delivered,  what  Chrifl:  Jefus  added 
to  my  text :  Amen. 


A  MINIATURE  HISTORY 

OF  THE 

BAPTISTS. 


AT  may  be  pleaftng  to  foms.of  my  readers  to  be 
prefented  with  a  brief  account  of  the  Baptifts.  I  (hall  extract 
this  account  from  the  writings  of  thofe  who  were  not  of  the 
Baptifts*  denomination,  but  rather  prejudiced  againft  them. 

Here  it  may  be  obferved,  that  the  religious  feci:  called  Baptifts^ 
have  caufed  the  learned  world  more  perplexity  and  refearch  to 
decypher  their  origin,  than  any  other  feci:  of  christians,  or,  per- 
haps, than  all  others.  Yes,  this  refearch  hath  baffled  all  their 
erudition  in  ancient  ftory. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  fix  the  period  when  one  feci  of  this 
denomination  was  firft  called  Petrobruflians,  when  another  was 
known  by  the  name  of  VVaterlandians,  when  a  third  was  denomi- 
nated Mennonites,  Sec.  But  the  difficulty  is  this,  to  afcertain 
the  time,  place  and  medium,  by  which  Chrtft's  difciples  were  led 
to  adopt  the  peculiar  fentiment,  which  is  now  held  by  thofe  called 
Baptifts,  and  which  diftinguifhes  them  from  all  other  denomina- 
tions. 

It  may  be  farther  obferved,  that  if  no  one,  however  learned 
and  wife,  be  able  to  trace  this  feel:  to  any  beginning  fhort  of  the 
days  of  the  apoftles,  or  of  Chrift,  it  is  poflible  that  it  then  arofe. 
Befides,  if  all  other  religious  denominations,  or  the  Psedobaptifts, 
who  include  all  which  are  not  Baptifts,  can  be  traced  to  a  pro- 
bable origin  fhort  of  the  apoftles,  and  the  Baptifts  car.not  be,  it 
affords  ftill  more  probability,  that  they  might  have  arifen  then. 

I  wifti  my  readers  to  indulge  me  in  one  queftion,  and  to  give  me 
an  explicit  anfwer.  Are  you  willing  to  have  the  origin  of  the 
Baptifts  explored,  and  to  open  your  eyes  to  the  light,  fliould 
light  be  afforded  ? 

You  cannot,  my  chriftian  readers,  unlefs  your  minds  be  unduly 
fwayed  by  prejudice,  do  otherwife  than  fay  Yes.  For,  though 
you  be  not  very  friendly  to  the  Baptifts*  you  will  not  deny  them 
what  you  grant  to  your  worft  enemy,  liberty  to  fpeak  the  truth, 
and  that  truth  its  weight,  at  leaft  in  meafure. 

L  2 


ii4  -^  Miniature  History 

It  ought  to  be  particularly  noted,  that  my  object  is  not  to  give 
the  hiftory  of  a  name,  but  of  a  principle.  I  mail  not  contend 
who  were  firft  called  Baptifts,  Anabaptifts,  Mennonites,  or  the 
like  ;  but  who  have  held  the  peculiar  fentiment  which  is  adopted 
by  thofe  who  are  called  Baptifts.  Wherever  we  find  this  prin- 
ciple, there  we  find  the  men,  the  chriftians,  who,  had  they  lived 
in  our  day,  would  be  ftyled  Baptifts.  Nor  is  the  prefent  con- 
troverfy  this,  whence  came  that  mode  of  baptifm,  which  is  prac- 
ticed by  all,  who  are  known  by  the  name  Baptifts.  For  this 
mode  is  granted,  generally,  if  not  univeifally,  by  ail  learned  and 
honeft  men,  to  be  as  ancient  as  John  the  Baptift  and  the  apoftles. 
This  mode  is,  indeed,  not  peculiar  to  the  Baptifts,  for  the  Paedo- 
baptifts,  for  many  centuries,  practiced  this  mode  j  and  many  of 
them  do,  to  this  day,  practice  immerilon. 

The  peculiar  chara&eriftic  of  the  Baptifts  is  this:  They  hold, 
that  the  ordinance  of  baptifm  is  to  be  adminiftered  to  adults,  or 
to  vifible  believers  only. 

One  natural  confequence  of  this  principle  is,  when  any  one 
who  was  baptized,  or  fprinkled,  in  his  infancy,  comes  over  to 
the  Baptifts'  fentiment,  they  require  him  to  be  baptized.  Hence 
they  are  called  Anabaptifts.  Another  very  natural  confequince 
is,  this  fentiment  conftrains  the  Baptifts  to  oppofe  the  baptifm  of 
infants  Hence  they  are  diftinguilhed  by  the  name  of  Antipce- 
dobaptifts. 

I  ihall  add  one  obfervation  more,  and  then  proceed  to  give 
you  a  fuccincl  hiftory  of  the  Baptifts.  The  obfervation  is  this  : 
Whenever  and  wherever  I  find  perfons,  who  hold  the  peculiar, 
charafteriftic,  fentiment  of  the  Baptifts,  I  fhall  call  them  by  that 
name.     Their  hiftory  now  follows. 

I.  The  origin  of  the  BaptiMs  can  be  found  no  where,  unlefs 
it  be  conceded,  that  it  was  at  Jordan,  or  Enoft. 

Dr.  MoHieim,  in  his  hiftory  of  the  Baptifts,  fays,  "  The  true 
er'f'in  of  that  fee"*,  which  acquired  the  denomination  of  the  Ana- 
baptifts by  their  adminiftering  anew  the  rite  of  baptifm  to  thofe 
who  come  over  to  their  communion,  and  derived  that  of  Men- 
nonites from  the  famous  man  to  whom  they  owe  the  greateft  part 
of  their  prefer.t  felicity,  is  hid  in  the  remote  depths  of  antiquity 
and  is  of  confequence  extremely  difficult  to  be  afcertained." 

Here,  Dr.  Mofheifn,  as  learned  an  hiftorian,  though  not  fo 
candid  a  one,  as  the  fcience  of  letters  can  boaft,  bears  pofitive 
ttftimony,  'hat  the  origin  of  the  Baptifts  is  hidden  in  the  remote 
tfepihs  of  knfiqi  tfy  N<  thing  is  more  evident  than  this  ;  the  Dr. 
eiihsr  knew  npt  their  origin,  or  was  not  candid  enough  to  confers 


of  the  Baptists*  115 

it.     At  Ieaft,  we  have  this  conclufion,  that  he  could  find  their 
origin  no  where  fliort  of  the  apoftles. 

II.  A  large  number  of  the  Baptift*  were  fcattered,  opprefTed, 
and  perfecuted,  through  many,  if  not  through  all,  the  nations  of 
Europe,  before  the  dawn  of  the  reformation  under  Luther  and 
Calvin.  When  Luther,  feconded  by  feveral  princes  of  the  petty 
frates  of  Germany,  arofe  in  oppofition  to  the  overgrown  ufurpa- 
tions  of  the  church  of  Rome,  the  Baptifts  alfo  arofe  from  their 
hiding  places.  They  hoped  that  what  they  had  been  long  ex- 
pecting and  praying  for  was  now  at  the  door  ;  the  time  in  which 
the  furtcrings  of  God's  people  fhould  be  greatly  terminated  :  but 
God  had  not  raifed  Luther's  views  of  reformation  to  nigh  the 
height  the  Baptifts  were  expecting.  Their  deteftation  of  the 
Mother  of  Harlots,  owing  to  their  bitter  experience  of  her 
cruelties,  and  the  clear  gofpel  light  with  which  they  had  been 
favoured  above  Luther,  and  their  ardent  defire  to  be  utterly 
delivered  from  her  cruel  oppreflions,  made  them  wifh  to  carry  the 
reformation  farther  than  God  had  appointed  Luther  to  accom- 
plifh.  They  were  foon  difappointed  in  Luther,  and  probably 
did  not  duly  appreciate  the  reformation  which  he  was  inftru- 
mentally  effecting.  It  was  as  might  have  been  expected  ;  the 
Lutherans  and  the  Baptifts  fell  out  by  the  way  ;  and  Calvin,  if 
not  Luther,  warmly  oppofed  them.  See  Mo/heim,  Cent.  XVI. 
Chap.  iii.  Seel.  3,  Part  2. 

Mofheim,  vol.  IV.  page  427,  fpesking  of  the  Baptifts,  fays, 
11  This  feet  ftarted  up  all  of  a  fudden,  in  feveral  countries,  at  the 
fame  point  of  time,  and  at  the  very  period  when  the  firft  contefts 
of  the  reformers  with  the  Roman  pontiffs  drew  the  attention  of 
the  world."  From  this  we  have  one  plain  and  fair  deduction  ; 
that  the  Baptifts  were  before  the  reformation  under  Luther  and 
Calvin,  and  therefore  did  not  take  their  rife  from  the  Enthufiafts 
under  Munzer  and  Storck,  or  at  that  time  ;  or  at  Munfter. 

III.  The  Huflites,  in  the  fifteenth  century,  the  WicklirRtes,  in 
the  fourteenth,  and  the  Petrobruffians,  in  the  twelfth,  and  the 
Walder.fes,  were  all  Baptifts.  To  this  fact  Dr.  Moftieim  bears 
the  following  teftimony*.  "It  may  be  obferved  that  the  Men- 
nonites  (i.  e  the  Baptifts  of  Eaft:  and  Weft  Friefland,  Holland, 
Gelderland,  Brabant,  Weftphalia  and  other  places  in  the  North 
of  Europe)  are  not  entirely  vustaken,  when  they  boaft  their  defcent 
from  the  VValdenfes,  Petrobruffians,  and  other  ancient  fects,  who 
are  ufualiy  confidered  as  witnesses  of  the  truth  in  times  of  univeifal 
darknefs  and  fuperftition.    Before  the  rife  of  Luther  and  Calvin, 

'  *  Vcl.  IV.  raScs428,  4C9.' 


1 1 6  A  Miniature  History 

there  lay  concealed  in  almost  all  the  countries  of  Europe,  particu- 
larly in  Bohemia,  Moravia,  Switzerland  and  Germany,  many 
perfons,  who  adhered  tenaciouilyto  the  followingdoctrine,  which 
the  Waldenfes,  WicklirHtes  and  Huflites  had  maintained  ;  fome 
in  a  more  difguifed  and  others  in"  a  more  open  and  public  manner, 
viz.  That  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  or  the  visible  church  he  had  estab- 
lished upon  earth,  <was  an  assembly  of  true  and  real  saints,  and  ought 
-therefore  to  be  inaccessible  to  the  wiched  and  unrighteous,  and  also 
exempt  from  all  those  institutions  which  human  prudence  suggests  to 
oppose  the  progress  of  iniquity,  or  to  correct  and  reform  transgressors. 
This  maxim  is  the  true  fource  of  all  the  peculiarities,  that  are  to 
be  found  in  the  religious  doctrine  and  difcipline  of  the  Menno- 
nites, (or  Baptifts  in  the  North  of  Europe)  and  it  is  moft  certain 
that  the  greatest  part  of  thefe  peculiarities  were  approved  of  by 
many  ofthofe  who,  before  the  dawn  of  the  reformation,  enter- 
tained the  notion  already  mentioned  relating  to  the  vifible  church 
of  Chrift." 

From  this  teftimony  of  Dr.  Mofheim  we  may  remark — 
i.  That  the  Mennonites  were  Baptifts,  or  A nabaptifts,  for 
thefe  different  names  he  ufes  to  exprefs  one  and  the  fame  thing. 
•  2.  That  the  Petrobruflians  were  Baptifts ;  for  the  Baptifts 
alTert,  and  Mofheim  allows  it,  that  they  were  their  progenitors  in 
principle  and  pra<5tice.  Befides,  in  his  hirtory  of  the  twelfth 
century,  part  II.  chap.  v.  feci.  7,  he  exprefsly  tells  us,  that  one 
of  their  tenets  was,  that  no  persons  whatsoever  were  to  be  baptized 
before  they  were  come  to  the  full  use  of  their  reason. 

3.  That  the  Waldenfes,  WicklirHtes  add  Huflites  were  Bap- 
tifts ;  for  as  Mofheim  fays,  they  all  held  to  the  great  and  leading 
maxim  which  is  the  true  fource  of  all  the  peculiarities  that  are  to 
be  found  in  the  religious  doctrine  and  difcipline  of  the  Mennonites. 
Thefe  feveral  denominations  of  chriftians  were  not  known  by  the 
ancient,  modern  and  appropriate  name,  Baptifts  But  their  doc- 
trine and  difcipline  were  the  fame  with  our  Baptifts,  and  were 
they  now  living,  they  would  be  thus  called.  In  other  words  j 
juft  fo  far  as  they  were  confiftent  with  their  great  and  leading 
maxim,  and  juft  f©  far  as  the  modern  Baptifts  are  confiftent  with 
their  great  and  leading  maxim,  juft  fo  far  thefe  ancient  and  modern 
Baptifts  are  alike  the  one  to  the  other. 

4.  That  in  the  fixtcenth  century  the  Waldenfes,  Petrobruf- 
fians  and  other  ancient  fects  (i.e.  of  the  Baptifts)  were  ufually 
confidered  as  having  been  witntlTes  of  rhe  truth,  in  the  times  of 
darknefs  and  univerfal  fuperftition.  How  differently  from  this 
would  and  do  many  conhder  them  in  our  day  ! 


of  the  Baptists.  117 

$.  It'll  at  before  the  rife  of  Luther  and  Calvin,  there  lay  con- 
cealed in  almoft  all  the  countries  of  Europe,  particularly  in 
Bohemia,  Moravia,  Switzerland  and  Germany,  many  perfons 
V/ho  held  the  fame  doctrine  and  difcipline  with  the  Baptifls  in  our 
day,  and  were,  of  neceiTary  and  fair  confequence,  of  the  fame 
denomination. 

IV.  We  have  already  traced  the  Baptifls  down  to  the  twelfth 
century.  We  have  alfo  found  that  they  were  fcattered  over 
almoft  all  the  countries  of  Europe,  and  were  in  the  dark  ages  of 
popery,  the  witneffes  of  the  truth  :  or  have  been  ufually  thus 
confidered.  Befides,  we  have  found  thai  the  Waldenfes  were, 
in  principle  and  prafHce,  Baptifls  ;  or  in  other  words,  we  have 
found  that  the  Waldenfes  were  Baptifls.  We  will  now  fee  to 
what  origin  we  can  trace  the  Waldenfes. 

Dr.  Maclaine,  who  tranflated  Mofheim's  church  hiflory  from 
the  original  Latin,  gives  us,  vol.  III.  pages  1 18,  1  19,  under  note, 
G,  the  following  hiflory  of  the  Waldenfes.  His  words  are, 
"  We  may  venture  to  affirm  the  contrary  (i.  e.  from  what 
Mofheim  had  ju(l  faid  of  the  Waldenfes  taking  their  name  from 
Peter  Waldus)  with  Beza  and  other  writers  of  note  ;  for  it  feems 
evident,  from  the  be  f  I  records,  that  Valdus  derived  his. name  from 
trie  true  Valdenfes  of  Piedmont,  whofe  doctrine  he  adopted,  and 
■who  were  known  by  the  names  of  Vaudois  and  Valdenfes,  before 
he,  or  his  immediate  followers,  exifled.  If  the  Valdenfes,  or 
Waldenfes,  had  derived  their  name  from  any  eminent  teacher,  it 
■would  probably  have  been  from  Valdo,  who  was  remarkable  for 
the  purity  of  his  doctrine,  in  the  ninth  century,  and  was  the 
cotemporary  and  chief  counfellor  of  Berengarius.  But  the  truth 
is,  that  they  derive  their  name  from  their  vallies  in  Piedmont, 
which  in  their  language  are  called  Vaux.  Hence  Vaudois,  their 
true  name:  Hence  Peter,  (or  as  others  call  him  John)  of  Lyons, 
•was  called  in  Latin  Valdus,  becaufe  he  had  adopted  their  doc- 
trine ;  and  hence  the  term  Valdenfes  and  Waldenfes,  ufed  by 
thofe  who  write  in  Englifh,  or  Latin,  in  the  place  of  Vaudois. 
The  bloody  Inquifitor  Reinerus  Sacco,  who  exerted  fuch  a 
furious  zeal  for  the  definition  of  the  Waldenfes,  lived  but  about 
eighty  years  after  Valdus  of  Lyons,  and  muft  therefore  be  fup- 
pofed  to  know  whether  or  not  he  was  the  real  founder  of  the 
Valdenfes,  or  Leonifls  ;  and  yet  it  is  remarkable,  that  he  fpeaks 
of  the  Leonifts  as  a  feci  that  had  flourifhed  about  five  hundred 
years  ;  nay,  mentions  authors  of  note,  who  make  their  antiquity 
remount  to  the  apoflolic  age.  See  the  account  given  of  Sacco's 
book  by  the  Jesuit  Gretser  in  the  Bibliotheca  Patrum.  I  know  not 
upon  what  principle  Dr.  Mofheim  maintains  that  the  inhabitants 


1 1 8  A  Miniature  History 

of  the  vallies  of  Piedmont  are  to  be  carefully  diftinguifhed  from 
the  Waldenfes,  and  I  am  perfuaded  that  whoever  will  be  at  the 
pains  to  read  attentively  the  id,  25th,  26th  and  27th  chapters  of 
the  firflbook  of  Leger's  Hiftoire  des  Eglifes  Vaudoifes,  will  find 
this  diftinclion  entirely  groundlefs. — When  the  papifts  afk  us 
where  our  religion  ivas  before  Luther,  we  generally  anfwer,  in 
the  Bible,  and  we  anfwer  well.  But  to  gratify  their  tafte  for 
tradition  and  human  authority,  we  may  add  to  this  ^nfwer-^-awaf 
in  the  vallies  of  Piedmont. ,y 

To  the  above  we  may  add,  one  of  the  Popilh  writers,  fpeaking 
•f  the  Waldenfes,  fays,  "  The  heresy  of  the  Waldenses  is  the  oldest 
heresy  in  the  world*." 

It  is  here  worthy  to  be  particularly  noticed. 
'  1.  That  Reinerus  Sacco  fpeaks  of  the  Waldenfes,  or  Baptifts, 
of  his  day,  as  a  feci  that  had,  at  that  time,  flourifhed  for  about 
five  hundred  years  ;  which  brings  the  hiftory   of  the  Baptifts, 
as  a  religious  feci,  down  to  the  fifth  century. 

2.  That  this  fame  Reinerus  Sacco  mentions  authors  of  note, 
who  make  the  antiquity  of  the  Waldenfean  Baptifts  to  remount 
to  the  apoftolic  age. 

3  That  the  Baptifts  are  the  mod  ancient  of  all  the  religious 
feels,  who  have  fet  themfelves  to  oppofe  the  ghoftly  powers  of  the 
-Romanifts. 

4.  That  if  there  be  any  body  of  chriftians,  who  have  exifted 
during  the  reign  of  antichrift,  or  of  the  man  of  fin,  the  Baptifts 
Lave  been  this  living  church  of  Jefus  Chrift. 

5.  The  confequence  of  the  whole  is  this:  The  Baptifts  have 
no  origin  fliort  of  the  apoftles.  They  arofe  in  the  days  of  John 
the  Baptift,  and  increafed  largely  in  the  days  of  our  blefTed 
Saviour,  when  he  fhowed  himfelf  unto  Ifrael,  and  in  the  days  of 
his  apoftles,  and  have  exifted,  under  the  fevereft  oppreilions,  with 
intervals  of  profperity,  ever  fince. 

But  as  to  the  Pssdobaptifts,  their  origin  is  at  once  traced  to 
about  the  middle  of  the  fecond  century;  when  the  myftery  of 
iniquity  not  only  began  to  work,  but,  by  its  fermentation,  had 
produced  this  error  of  fruitful  evils,  namely,  that  baptifm  was 
effential  to  falvation  ;  yes,  that  it  was  regeneration.  Hence  arofe 
the  neceflity  of  baptizing  children.  Now  comes  forward  Irenaeus, 
and  informs  that  the  church  had  a  tradition  from  the  apoftles  to 
give  baptifm  to  infants.  We  are  told  in  the  Appendix  to 
Mofheim's  Church  Hiftory,  that  one  of  the  remarkable  things 
which  took  place  in  the  fecond  century  was  the  baptizing  of 

*  President  Edwards's  History  of  Redemption,  p.  267- 


of  the  Baptists.  1 19 

infants,  it  being  never  known  before,  as  a  chridian  ordinance  for 
them. 

What  a  pity  it  is,  that  good  men,  who  have  renounced  the 
error,  which  was,  as  church  hiilory  informs  us,  the  progenitor  of 
infant  baptifm,  (hould  (till  retain  its  practical  and  erroneous  off- 
fpring,  to  the  prejudice  and  marring  of  the  church  of  God  !  Not 
a  fingle  feci:  of  the  Pasdobaptids  can  find  its  origin  nearer  to  the 
apodles  than  the  fecond  century.  We  hence  conclude,  that  their 
origin  was  there,  and  that  they  then  and  there  arofe  in  the  myftery 
which  was  then  working.  May  the  Father  of  lights  open  the 
eyes  of  my  brethren,  that  they  may  come  out  of  this,  perhaps, 
the  lad  thicket  of  grofs  error  and  darknefs. 

I  v  ill  now  add — 

V  The  testimony  which  Prefident  Edwards  bears  in  favor 
of  the  Waldenfes  and  other  faithful  ones,  who  were  fcattered 
through  all  parts  of  Europe  in  the  dark  ages  of  popery.  It  is  the 
following. 

"In  every  age  of  this  dark  time,  there  appeared  particular 
perfons  in  all  parts  of  Chriftendom,  who  bore  a  tedimony  againft 
the  corruptions  and  tyranny  of  the  church  of  Rome.  There  is 
no  one  age  of  antichriil,  even  in  the  darked  time  of  all,  but  eccle- 
fiadical  hi(tori:ms  mention  a  great  many  by  name,  who  manifeded 
an  abhorrence  of  the  pope  and  his  idolatrous  worfhip,  and  plead 
for  the  ancient  purity  of  doctrine  and  worfhip.  God  was  pleafed 
to  maintain  an  uninterrupted  fucceflion  of  witnefTes,  through  the 
whole  time,  in  Germany,  France,  Britain,  and  other  countries,  as 
hidoiians  demonitrate,  and  mention  them  by  name,  and  give  an 
account  of  the  tedimony  which  they  held.  Many  of  them  were 
private  perfons,  and  many  of  them  miniders,  and  fome  magidrates 
and  perfons  of  great  didinclion.  And  there  were  numbers  in 
every  age,  who  were  perfecuted  and  put  to  death  for  this 
tedimony. 

"  Befides  thefe  partkular  perfons,  difperfed  here  and  there, 
there  was  a  certain  people,  called  the  Waldenfes,  who  lived 
feparate  from  all  the  red  of  the  world,  who  kept  themfelvespure, 
*and  con dantly  bore  a  tedimony  againd  the  church  of  Rome, 
through  all  this  dark  time.  The  place  where  they  dwelt  was 
the  Vaudois,  or  the  five  vallies  of  Piedmont,  a  very  mountainous 
country,  between  Italy  and  France.  The  place  where  they  lived 
was  compafied  with  rhofe  exceeding  high  mountains,  called  the 
Alps,  which  were  almod  impaffable.  The  pafTage  over  thefe 
mountainous,  defert  countries,  was  fo  difficult,  that  the  vallies 
where  this  people  dwelt  were  almod  inpccefilble.  There  this 
people  lived  for  many  ages,  as  it  were  alone,  where,  in  a  date  of 


Jio  A  Miniature  History 

feparation  from  all  the  world,  having. very  little,  to  do  with  any 
other  people;  they  ferved  God  in  the  ancient  purity  of  His 
worfhip,  and  never  fubmitted  to  the  church  of  Rome.  This  place, 
in  this  defert,  mountainous  country,  probably  was  the  place, 
efpecialiy  meant  in  the  xii.  chap,  of  Revelations,  6  verfe,  as  the 
place  prepared  of  God  for  the  woman,  that  they  mould  feed  her 
there  during  the  reign  of  antichrift. 

"  Some  of  the  popifh  writers  themfelves  own  that  that  people 
never  fubmitted  to  the  church  of  Rome.  One  of  the  popifh. 
writers,  fpeaking  of  the  Waldenfes,  fays,  the  herefy  of  the  Wal- 
denfes  is  the  oldeft  herefy  in  the  world.  It  is  fuppofed,  that  this 
people  fir  ft  betook  themfelves  to  this  defert,  fecret  place  among 
the  mountains  to  hide  themfelves  from  the  feverity  of  the  heathen 
perfecutions,  which  were  before  Conftantine  the  Great,  and  thus 
the  woman  fled  into  the  wildernefs  from  the  face  of  the  ferpent, 
Rev.  xii.  6  ;  and  fo  verfe  14,  And  to  the  woman  were  given  two 
wings  of  a  great  eagle*  that  fhe  might  fly  into  the  wildernefs  into 
her  place,  where  fhe  is  nourifhed  for  a  time  and  times  and  half  a 
time  from  the  face  of  the  ferpent.  And  the  people  being  fettled 
there,  their  pofterity  continued  there  from  age  to  age  afterwards, 
and  being  as  it  were  by  natural  walls,  as  well  as  by  God's  grace, 
feparated  from  the  reft  of  the  world,  never  partook  of  the  over- 
flowing corruption." 

It  is  hoped  that  the  reader  will  very  carefully  and  candidly 
compare  what  is  teftified  to  us  by  three  very  learned  men,  Dr. 
Mofheim,  Dr.  Maclaine,  and  President  Edwards.  The  teftimony 
of  the  firft  is,  that  the  Waldenfes  and  many  others  who  are  usually 
considered  as  witnesses  of the  truth  in  the  times  of  universal  dark- 
ness  and  supers titiony  were  efTentially  agreed  with  the  Baptifts  of 
modern  date,  as  to  principle  and  practice,  or  as  to  the  great  maxim 
whence  flow  all  the  peculiarities  of  that  denomination.  His 
teftimony,  in  fhort,  is  this ;  the  Huflites,  the  Wickliffitea,  the 
Petrobruflians,  and  the  Waldenfes,  with  other  witnefles  of  the 
truth,  fcattered  over  Europe,  in  the  dark  ages  of  popery,  wjere 
efTentially  the  fame  with  the  Baptifts  of  later  times  :  or  that  they 
all  were  what  we  call  Baptifts. 

Dr.  Maclaine  teftifies  that  the  Waldenfes  flourifhed  as  early 
as  the  fifth  century  :  yes,  he  informs  us  that  fome  authors  of  note 
carry  their  antiquity  up  to  the  apoftolic  age. 

Prefident  Edwards  informs  us  thr,t  thefe  Waldenfes  were  the 
main  body  of  the  church,  in  the  dark  ages,  and  have  been, 
together  with  their  fcattered  brethren,  the  pure  church  of  Jefus 
Chrift,  during  the  reign  of  antichrift,  and,  of  certain  confequence, 
were  iucoeflbrs  of  die  pure  church,  from  the  days  of  Chrift  and 
his  apoliles. 


of  the  Baptists.  121 

The  fair  confequence  of  all  is  this,  that  the  Baptifts  have  been 
the  uninterrupted  church  of  our  Lord  from  the  apoftles'  day 
to  ours. 

I  may,  indeed,  exclaim,  What  have  I  been  believing,  what 
have  I  been  doing,  with  refpect  to  the  Baptifts,  all  my  days  ! 

I  know,  and  I  confefs,  that  the  hiftory  of  the  church  affures 
me,  that  the  denomination  of  chriftians  to  which  I  have  belonged, 
and  to  which  I  do  (till  vifibly  belong,  came  through  the  church 
of  Rome,  and  was  broken  off  from  the  mother  of  harlots,  and  it 
is  not  greatly  to  be  wondered  at,  if  all  her  filth  fhould  not  be  yet 
wiped  away.  At  the  fame  time,  the  fame  hiftory  afTures  me, 
that  the  Baptifts  never  have  fubmitted  to  her  fuperftitions  and 
filthy  abominations. 

I  am  fomewhat  furprifed  at  my  own  long  continued  ignorance, 
and  at  the  yet  remaining  darknefs  of  my  brethren,  as  to  this 
matter.  But  above  all,  what  (hall  I  fay  at  the  hard  oppofition 
which  fome  good  men  yet  maintain  againft  their  brethren,  the 
Baptifts  ?  Surely,  they  might  with  great  propriety  be  addreffed 
in  the  words  of  Gamaliel  ;  *'  Take  heed  to  yourfelves  what  ye 
intend  to  do,  as  touching  thefe  men."  If  ye  will  not  favor 
them,  "  refrain  from  them,  and  let  them  alone ;  for,  if  their 
counfel  or  their  work  be  of  men,  it  will  come  to  nought ;  but  if 
it  be  of  God,  ye  cannot  overthrow  it ;  left  haply  ye  be  found 
•even  to  fight  againft  God." 

All  the  power,  craft  and  cruelty  of  the  wicked,  though  prac- 
ticed for  nighly  one  thoufand  eight  hundred  years,  have  not  been 
1  able  to  prevail  againft  them.  Surely  the  mifguided  zeal  of  good 
men  will  not. 

In  this  fhort  Hiftory  of  the  Baptifts,  we  fee  the  continued 
accomplifhment  of  one  of  Chrift's  promifTory  predictions,  which 
is,  Matt.  xvi.  18.  The  gates  of  hell  (hall  not  prevail  againft  the 
church.  That  denomination  of  Chriftians  which  are  called 
Baptifts,  are  the  only  known  fociety  of  profeffing  chriftians, 
againft  which  Satan  hath  not  prevailed,  either  in  point  of  doctrine, 
or  difcipline,  or  both.  This  church,  or  old  and  inveterate  herefy, 
as  fatan  would  call  it,  he  acknowledges,  by  the  mouth  of  his 
fervants,  the  Romanifts,  that  he  could  never  fubdue.  It  is  true, 
fatan  hath  joined  many  of  his  legions  to  it,  as  he  did  many  falfe 
brethren  to  the  difciples  in  the  days  of  the  apoftles.  But  he  hath 
never,  no,  not  for  an  hour,  prevailed  upon  this  ancient  and  pri- 
mitive church  to  give  up  the  doctrines  of  grace,  or  the  adminis- 
trations of  the  ordinances  as  Chrift  delivered  them  to  his  people. 
That  which  (he  firft  received,  (he  ftill  holds  faft,  and  will.  In 
all   the  hiftory  of  the   church,  we  read  of  no  other  body  of 

M 


122  A  Miniature  History,  &c. 

profefiing  chiiftians,  after  which  fatan  hath  caft  fuch  a  continual 
flood  of  waters  j  but  hitherto  the  earth  hath  helped  the  woman, 
and  the  flood  of  perfecution  hath  not  prevailed.  Satan's  future 
efforts  will  be  equally  without  effect. 

My  Fathers  and  Brethren  in  the  miniftry,  and  my  brethren 
among  the  profefTed  difciples  of  the  Lord  Jefus  Chrift,  fuffer  a 
word  of  exhortation. 

If  you  will  not  take  up  the  crofs,  and  fo  increafe  the  number 
ofChrift's  continually  preferved,  yet  always  fuffering,  little  flock, 
be  ye  careful  how  ye  fet  yourfelves  in  array  againft  them.  For 
more  are  they  who  pre  for  them,  than  are  thofe  who  are  againft 
them.  With  you  is  an  arm  of  flefh,  in  all  your  oppositions,  but 
with  them  is  the  Lord  their  God  to  help  them,  and  he  will  help 
them  ;  and  by  and  by  he  will  help  them  right  early. 

I  mail  be  very  pleafingly  difappointed,  mould  I  not  be,  by 
many  of  you  who  are  rulers  in  Ifrael,  fet  at  nought,  for  coming 
over  to  the  help  of  the  Lord  againft  the  mighty.  But,  if  I  may 
but  know  the  truth,  and  pleafe  the  Lord,  it  is,  with  me,  but  a 
comparatively  fmall  thing  to  be  judged  of  you,  or  of  man's  judg- 
ment. I  do,  indeed,  wi(h  for  the  continuance  of  your  good 
opinion  and  friendfhip,  but  I  cannot  pofTefs  them  at  the  expenfe  of 
truth.  That  I  might  teftify  unto  you  thefe  things,  I  have  rifked 
every  thing  which  the  world  calls  valuable.  I  am  now  deter- 
mined, and  through  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jefus  Chrift  I  hope 
that  to  the  end  of  my  life  I  fhall  be  determined,  to  venture  every 
thing  in  defence  of  the  doctrines  and  ordinances  and  church  of 
the  Son  of  God.  I  befeech  all  of  you,  who  know  the  grace  of 
our  Lord  Jefus,  that  ye  do  not  as  did  many  of  the  chief  rulers  in 
Ifrael.  They  believed  on  Chrift,  but  did  not  confefs  him,  becaufe 
of  the  Pharifees,  left  they  mould  be  put  out  of  the  fynagogue  ;  for 
they  loved  the  praife  of  men,  more  than  the  praife  of  God.  John 
xii.  42,  43. 

You  have  now  heard  me,  and  now  know  what  I  do.  You 
will  therefore  now  make  up  your  judgment.  But,  I  pray  you, 
remember  one  thing  :  With  what  judgment  ye  judge,  ye  fhall  be 
judged. 

I  am,  Reader, 

Thy  Servant,  for  the  Gofpel's  Sake, 

DANIEL  MERRILL. 


EXTRACT 

FROM  THE  BAPTIST  MISSIONARY  MAGAZINE,  NO*  4. 


ACCOUNT 


OF    THE 


BAPTIST  CHURCH, 

Lately  Constituted  at  Sedgwick,  District  of  Maine. 


1  HE  Rev.  Daniel  Merrill,  graduated 
at  Dartmouth  College,  1789,  was  ordained  over  the 
Congregational  Church  in  Sedgwick,  in  September, 
1793.  His  labours  have  been  very  much  bleffed 
among  his  people,  who  have  experienced  feveral 
precious  feafons  of  revival  under  his  miniflry,  par- 
ticularly in  the  years  1798,  and  i8or. 

Several  circumftances  occurred  to  lead  Mr. 
Merrill,  in  the  courfe  of  the  lafl:  year,  to  review,  with 
more  critical  attention,  the  grounds  on  which  he  had 
practiced  infant  baptism.  The  refult  of  his  inquiries 
may  be  learned  from  the  preceding  Sermons  on 
Baptifm,  and  from  the  following  account  of  his 
baptifm,  &c. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  church  (or  covenanted 
brethren)  Feb.  28,  1805,  they  voted  unanimoufly 
to  fend  for  a  council  of  Baptifl  miniflers  to  come  and 
affifl  them  in  the  following  particulars,  viz.  ift.  To 
adminifler  chriftian  baptifm  to  them  ;  2d.  To  con- 
ftitute  them  into  a  church  upon  the  primitive  Baptifl 


J24  Account  of  Sedgwick 

platform ;  3d.  To  fet  over  them  in  the  Lord,  the 
Rev.  Daniel  Merrill,  to  be  their  minifter. 

Agreeably  to  their  requeft,  Meffrs.  Pitman  of 
Providence,  Baldwin  of  Bofton,  and  Williams  of 
Beverly,  accompanied  by  a  number  of  brethren, 
took  paiTage  at  Salem,  at  8  o'clock  on  Thurfday 
evening  the  9th  day  of  May,  inftant,  and  arrived  at 
Sedgwick  the  Saturday  following,  at  one,  P.  M. 
Lord's-day,  half  pad  10  o'clock,  Mr.  Pitman 
preached  from  Acts  v.  20.  After  an  intermiilion  of 
half  an  hour,  Mr.  Baldwin  preached  from  1  Cor. 
iii.  9.  After  another  intermiflion  of  a  few  minutes, 
Mr.  Williams  addrefTed  the  people  again  from  Prov. 
xxv.  25.  At  6,  Mr.  Baldwin  preached  again,  from 
Sol.  Song,  i.  8. 

Monday,  May  1 2,  at  2,  P.M.  the  council  formed, 
and  adjourned  until  the  next  day.  At  3,  affembled 
in  the  meeting-houfe,  and  Mr.  Williams  preached 
from  John  xiv.  21.  After  which  proceeded  to  an 
examination  of  the  candidates  for  baptifm,  until  the 
day  was  fpent. 

Tuefday,  13th,  examined  a  number  more  candi- 
dates. At  half  pad  10,  Mr,  Williams  preached 
particularly  on  the  inftitution,  from  Acts  ii.  41. 
Immediately  after,  we  repaired  to  the  water's  fide. 
The  place  fixed  upon  for  the  administration  of  this 
folemn  ordinance  was  in  the  tidewaters  of  Benjamin's 
River,  about  one  mile  from  the  fea.  A  more  beauti- 
ful or  convenient  place  is  fcarcely  to  be  imagined. 

The  land  adjoining  was  fufficiently  elevated  to 
accommodate  fpectators  with  the  belt  poffible  prof- 
peel  ;  and  yet  Hoping  fo  gently  to  the  margin  of  the 
river,  that  thofe  at  the  fartheft  diftance  might  fee  as 
plainly  as  thofe  who  flood  nighefl. 

As  foon  as  the  people  were  affembled  at  the 
water's  fide,  folemn  prayer  was  offered  up  to  that 


Baptist  Church,  I2jf 

God  whofe  ordinance  we  were  going  to  attend,  A 
profound  filence  reigned  through  the  affembly,  when 
Mr.  Baldwin  took  Mr.  Merrill  by  the  hand,  and 
walking  {lowly  into  the  water,  repeated  thefe  words, 
And  they  went  down  both  into  the  water,  both  Philip 
and  the  Eunuch,  and  he  baptized  him.  When  they 
had  gotten  to  a  fuitable  depth,  the  ordinance  was 
performed.  Mr.  Merrill,  rifing  from  the  watery  grave 
with  a  very  pleafant,  fmiling  countenance,  could  not 
refrain  expreffing  the  heart-felt  fatisfaftion  he 
enjoyed  in  this  act  of  obedience.  As  they  afcended 
out  of  the  water,  Mr.  Williams  went  down  with 
Mrs.  Merrill,  repeating  thefe  words,  And  they  were 
both  righteous  before  God,  walking  in  all  the  command- 
ments  and  ordinances  of  the  Lord  blameless.  In  this 
way  the  baptizing  was  conducted,  until  all  the  can- 
didates prefent  were  baptized.  Here,  we  beheld 
fixty-fix  perfons  buried  in  baptifm  by  thefe  two 
adminiftrators,  in  forty-two  minutes!  The  candidates, 
both  females  as  well  as  males,  defcended  into  the 
water  with  the  greateft  calmnefs  imaginable  ;  and 
in  general  they  came  out  of  it  rejoicing  in  fuch  a 
manner  as  we  have  feldom  feen.  Numbers  of  them 
could  not  refrain  giving  glory  to  God  our  Saviour, 
who  by  his  own  example  marked  out  this  humble, 
bleffed  way.  The  fpettators  behaved  with  the 
utmoft  propriety.  They  were  not  only  folemn,  but 
many  of  them  were  in  tears.  A  heart  mud  be 
adamant  not  to  have  foftened  at  fuch  a  moving  fcene. 
The  fervice  was  concluded  by  prayer  and  finging. 

At  5  o'clock  the  people  affembled  again  at  the 
meeting-houfe,  and  Mr.  Pitman  preached  to  them 
from  John  xii.  26. 

Wednefday  morning  the  Council  met  and  arranged 
the  bufinefs  of  the  afternoon.  Then  examined  and 
baptized  nineteen  candidates  more,  in  the  fame  place 


il6  Account,  &c. 

and  manner  as  defcribed  above.  At  i  o'clock 
afTembled  again  in  the  meeting-honfe  ;  when  the 
baptized  members,  having,  as  we  hope;  firft  given 
themfelves  to  the  Lord,  now  gave  themfelves  to  one 
another  by  the  will  of  God.  After  thus  covenant- 
ing with  each  other,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Cafe,  by  the 
appointment  of  the  council,  addrefled  them  in  a  few 
words,  and  gave  the  right  hand  to  them,  in  token  of 
our  fellowfhip  with  them  as  a  filter  church  of  Chrift ; 
and  by  folemn  prayer,  commended  them  to  God  and 
the  word  of  his  grace,  which  is  able  to  build  them  up, 
and  give  them  an  inheritance  among  all  them  that  are 
sanctified. 

The  council  immediately  proceeded  to  ordain  Mr. 
Merrill. — Mr.  Baldwin  introduced  the  folemnity  by 
prayer ;  and  then  addrefled  the  people  in  a  well- 
adapted,  and  very  impreflive  difcourfe,  founded  on 
part  of  the  3d  verfe  of  the  epiftle  of  Jude  :  Earnestly 
contend  for  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints.  The 
ordaining  prayer  was  made  by  the  Rev.  Elifha  Snow 
of  Thomaftown  ;  the  charge,  by  the  Rev.  Abraham 
Cummings  of  Vinal-Haven  ;  the  right  hand  of 
fellowfhip,  by  the  Rev.  Elifha  Williams  of  Beverly  ; 
and  the  concluding  prayer,  by  the  Rev.  John 
Pitman  of  Providence. 


JULY,  1805. 

PILGRIM'S  PROGRESS, 

WITH    THE    NOTES    OF    THE   REV,    MR.    BURDER. 


S.  C.  USTICK,  BURLINGTON,  NEW-JERSEY, 
PROPOSES  TO  PUBLISH 

THE  PILGRIMS  PROGRESS. 

IN  TWO  PARTS. 

by  JOHN  BUNYAN. 

With  Large  Explanatory  Notes,  and  the  Life  of  the 
Author the  whole  divided  into  Chapters. 

BY  G.  BURDER, 

Minister  of  the  Gospel  at  Coventry,  England. 

Embellished  with  Tea  handsome  CUTS,   engraved  by  Dr.  Airferson, 

of  New-York. 


TERMS. 

THE  above  excellent  Work,  containing  above 
400  pages,  Duodecimo,  fhall  be  neatly  printed  on 
good  paper  and  large  type  (of  which  this  Pamphlet 
is  a  fpecimen)  well  bound  and  lettered,  and  delivered 
to  Subfcribers,  at  the  very  low  price  of  One  Dollar 
and  Twelve  and  an  half  Cents. — To  Non -Subfcri- 
bers, the  price  will  be  One  Dollar  twenty-Jive  Cents. 


Thofe  who  are  fo  obliging  as  to  interefl:  themfelves 
in  procuring  patrons,  fliall  be  entitled  to  a  difcount 
of  ten  per  cent, 

A  List  of  the  Subscribers9  Names  shall  be  Printed 
at  the  end  of  the  Work. 

0-  The  Work  is  now  in  Prefs  ; — thofe  therefore 
who  hold  Subfcriptions,  are  requested  to  return 
them±>y  the  firft  of  September,  and  fuch  as  are 
defirous  of  patronizing  the  publication,  are  refpeft- 
fully  folicited  to  come  forward  with  their  names, 
which  will  be  thankfully  received,  by  that  time,  as 
then  the  Subfcription  will  be  clofed. 


Subscriptions  received,  in  Boston,  by  Messrs.  Manning  and  Loring, 
Booksellers ;  Providence,  R.  I.  by  the  Rev.  Stephen  Gano,  and  the 
Rev.  John  Pitman;  Newhaven,  by  Rev.  Stephen  S.  Nelson  ;  Nevs- 
York,  Mr.  John  Tiebout,  Printer,  Water- Street;  Newark,  N.  J.  by 
Rev.  Charles  Lahatt;  Middletown,  Rev.  Benjamin  Bennet;  Hights- 
Town,  Rev.  Peter  Wilson;  Hopewell,  Rev.  James  M'Laughlin  ; 
Trenton,  James  J.  Wilson,  Esq.;  New-Mills,  Rev.  Isaac  Carhle  ; 
Mount-Holly,  Rev.  Alexander  M'Gowan ;  Cohansey,  Rev.  Henry 
Smalley ;  Deerfield,  Mr.  Elkanah  K.  Dare ;  Salem,  Mr.  David 
Sheppard ;  New-Britain,  Dr.  Hough  ;  Hill  Town,  Joseph  Mathias  ; 
Lower  Dublin,  P.  Thomas  Holme,  Esq. ;  Philadelphia,  by  the  Rey. 
W.  White,  No.  444,  N.  Second-Street ;  Mr.  John  Bradley,  No.  82, 
Market-Street;  Mr.  W.  W.  Woodward,  No.  52,  S.  Second-Street; 
and  Rev.  John  P.  Peckworth,  149,  S.  Second-Street ;  Wilmington, 
Del.  Rev,  Mr.  Dodge  ;  Pittsburgh,  Mr.  Zadok  Cramer,  &c.  &c.  and 
by  the  Publisher  in  Burlington. 


\ 


f    \  X. 


I 


SV 


m 


